Steel Bridge Design Handbook Design Example 2A

U.S.
Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
Steel Bridge Design Handbook

Design Example 2A:
Two-Span Continuous Straight
Composite Steel I-Girder Bridge
Publication No. FHWA-HIF-16-002 - Vol. 21
December 2015
FOREWORD
This handbook covers a full range of topics and design examples intended to provide bridge
engineers with the information needed to make knowledgeable decisions regarding the selection,
design, fabrication, and construction of steel bridges. Upon completion of the latest update, the
handbook is based on the Seventh Edition of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications.
The hard and competent work of the National Steel Bridge Alliance (NSBA) and prime
consultant, HDR, Inc., and their sub-consultants, in producing and maintaining this handbook is
gratefully acknowledged.
The topics and design examples of the handbook are published separately for ease of use, and
available for free download at the NSBA and FHWA websites: http://www.steelbridges.org, and
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge, respectively.
The contributions and constructive review comments received during the preparation of the
handbook from many bridge engineering processionals across the country are very much
appreciated. In particular, I would like to recognize the contributions of Bryan Kulesza with
ArcelorMittal, Jeff Carlson with NSBA, Shane Beabes with AECOM, Rob Connor with Purdue
University, Ryan Wisch with DeLongs, Inc., Bob Cisneros with High Steel Structures, Inc.,
Mike Culmo with CME Associates, Inc., Mike Grubb with M.A. Grubb & Associates, LLC, Don
White with Georgia Institute of Technology, Jamie Farris with Texas Department of
Transportation, and Bill McEleney with NSBA.
Joseph L. Hartmann, PhD, P.E.

Director, Office of Bridges and Structures
Notice
This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation in
the interest of information exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for use of the
information contained in this document. This report does not constitute a standard, specification,
or regulation.
Quality Assurance Statement
The Federal Highway Administration provides high-quality information to serve Government,
industry, and the public in a manner that promotes public understanding. Standards and policies
are used to ensure and maximize the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of its information.
FHWA periodically reviews quality issues and adjusts its programs and processes to ensure
continuous quality improvement.
Technical Report Documentation Page
1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipients Catalog No.
FHWA-HIF-16-002 - Vol. 21
4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date
Steel Bridge Design Handbook Design Example 2A: Two-Span December 2015
Continuous Straight Composite Steel I-Girder Bridge 6. Performing Organization Code
7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No.

Karl Barth, Ph.D. (West Virginia University)
9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No.
HDR, Inc..
11 Stanwix Street 11. Contract or Grant No.
Suite 800 DTFH6114D00049
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered
Office of Bridges and Structures Technical Report
Federal Highway Administration Final Report
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE December 2014 November 2015
Washington, D.C. 20590 14. Sponsoring Agency Code
15. Supplementary Notes

The previous version of this Handbook was published as FHWA-IF-12-052 and was developed to be current with the AASHTO
LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, 5th Edition with the 2010 Interims. FHWA-HIF-16-002 was updated in 2015 by HDR,
Inc., to be current with the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, 7th Edition.
16. Abstract
The purpose of this example is to illustrate the use of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design for the design of a continuous two span
steel I-girder bridge. The design process and corresponding calculations for steel I-girders are the focus of this example, with
particular emphasis placed on illustration of the optional moment redistribution procedures. All aspects of the girder design are
presented, including evaluation of the following: cross-section proportion limits, constructibility, serviceability, fatigue, and
strength requirements. Additionally, the weld design for the web-to-flange joint of the plate girders is demonstrated along with
all applicable components of the stiffener design and cross frame member design.
17. Key Words 18. Distribution Statement

Steel Bridge, Steel I-Girder, AASHTO LRFD, Moment No restrictions. This document is available to the public through
Redistribution, Cross Frame Design the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA
22161.
19. Security Classif. (of this report) 20. Security Classif. (of this page) 21. No of Pages 22. Price
Unclassified Unclassified
Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed pages authorized

Steel Bridge Design Handbook Design Example 2A:
Two-Span Continuous Straight Composite Steel
I-Girder Bridge
Table of Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 1
2.0 DESIGN PARAMETERS ..................................................................................................... 2
3.0 GIRDER GEOMETRY ......................................................................................................... 4
3.1 Web Depth ....................................................................................................................... 4
3.2 Web Thickness ................................................................................................................. 4
3.3 Flange Geometries ........................................................................................................... 5
4.0 LOADS .................................................................................................................................. 8
4.1 Dead Loads ...................................................................................................................... 8
4.1.1 Component Dead Load (DC) .................................................................................. 8
4.1.2 Wearing Surface Dead Load (DW)......................................................................... 9
4.2 Vehicular Live Loads ....................................................................................................... 9
4.2.1 General Vehicular Live Load (Article 3.6.1.2) ..................................................... 10
4.2.2 Optional Live Load Deflection Load (Article 3.6.1.3.2) ...................................... 10
4.2.3 Fatigue Load (Article 3.6.1.4)............................................................................... 11
4.3 Wind Loads .................................................................................................................... 11
4.4 Load Combinations ........................................................................................................ 11
5.0 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS............................................................................................... 13
5.1 Multiple Presence Factors (Article 3.6.1.1.2) ................................................................ 13
5.2 Live-Load Distribution Factors (Article 4.6.2.2) ........................................................... 13
5.2.1 Live-Load Lateral Distribution Factors Positive Flexure .................................. 13
5.2.1.1 Interior Girder Strength and Service Limit States ........................... 15
5.2.1.1.1 Bending Moment .......................................................................... 15
5.2.1.1.2 Shear ............................................................................................. 16
5.2.1.2 Exterior Girder Strength and Service Limit States .......................... 16
i
5.2.1.2.1 Bending Moment .......................................................................... 16
5.2.1.2.2 Shear ............................................................................................. 19
5.2.1.3 Fatigue Limit State .............................................................................. 20
5.2.1.3.1 Bending Moment .......................................................................... 20
5.2.1.3.2 Shear ............................................................................................. 20
5.2.1.4 Distribution Factor for Live-Load Deflection..................................... 21
5.2.2 Live-Load Lateral Distribution Factors Negative Flexure................................. 21
5.2.3 Dynamic Load Allowance .................................................................................... 23
6.0 ANALYSIS RESULTS ....................................................................................................... 24
6.1 Moment and Shear Envelopes ....................................................................................... 24
6.2 Live Load Deflection ..................................................................................................... 29
7.0 LIMIT STATES ................................................................................................................... 30
7.1 Service Limit State (Articles 1.3.2.2 and 6.5.2)............................................................. 30
7.2 Fatigue and Fracture Limit State (Article 1.3.2.3 and 6.5.3) ......................................... 30
7.3 Strength Limit State (Articles 1.3.2.4 and 6.5.4) ........................................................... 30
7.4 Extreme Event Limit State (Articles 1.3.2.5 and 6.5.5) ................................................. 30
8.0 SAMPLE CALCULATIONS .............................................................................................. 31
8.1 Section Properties .......................................................................................................... 31
8.1.1 Section 1 Positive Bending Region.................................................................... 31
8.1.1.1 Effective Flange Width (Article 4.6.2.6) ............................................ 31
8.1.1.2 Elastic Section Properties: Section 1 .................................................. 32
8.1.1.3 Plastic Moment: Section 1 .................................................................. 33
8.1.1.4 Yield Moment: Section 1 .................................................................... 34
8.1.2 Section 2 Negative Bending Region .................................................................. 35
8.1.2.1 Effective Flange Width (Article 4.6.2.6) ............................................ 35
8.1.2.2 Minimum Negative Flexure Concrete Deck Reinforcement (Article
6.10.1.7) 35
8.1.2.3 Elastic Section Properties: Section 2 .................................................. 36
8.1.2.4 Plastic Moment: Section 2 .................................................................. 38
8.1.2.5 Yield Moment: Section 2 .................................................................... 39
8.2 Exterior Girder Check: Section 2 ................................................................................... 40
8.2.1 Strength Limit State (Article 6.10.6) .................................................................... 41
ii
8.2.1.1 Flexure (Appendix A6) ....................................................................... 41
8.2.1.2 Moment Redistribution (Appendix B6, Articles B6.1 B6.5) ........... 48
8.2.1.2.1 Web Proportions ........................................................................... 48
8.2.1.2.2 Compression Flange Proportions .................................................. 48
8.2.1.2.3 Compression Flange Bracing Distance ......................................... 49
8.2.1.2.4 Shear ............................................................................................. 49
8.2.1.3 Moment Redistribution - Refined Method (Appendix B6, Article B6.6)
52
8.2.1.4 Shear (6.10.6.3) ................................................................................... 54
8.2.2 Constructibility (Article 6.10.3) ............................................................................ 54
8.2.2.1 Flexure (Article 6.10.3.2).................................................................... 55
8.2.2.2 Shear (Article 6.10.3.3) ....................................................................... 55
8.2.3 Service Limit State (Article 6.10.4) ...................................................................... 56
8.2.3.1 Permanent Deformations (Article 6.10.4.2) ........................................ 56
8.2.4 Fatigue and Fracture Limit State (Article 6.10.5) ................................................. 59
8.2.4.1 Load Induced Fatigue (Article 6.6.1.2) ............................................... 59
8.2.4.2 Distortion Induced Fatigue (Article 6.6.1.3) ....................................... 61
8.2.4.3 Fracture (Article 6.6.2) ....................................................................... 61
8.2.4.4 Special Fatigue Requirement for Webs (Article 6.10.5.3).................. 61
8.3 Exterior Girder Check: Section 1 ................................................................................... 61
8.3.1 Constructibility (Article 6.10.3) ............................................................................ 61
8.3.1.1 Deck Placement Analysis ................................................................... 61
8.3.1.1.1 Strength I....................................................................................... 63
8.3.1.1.2 Special Load Combination (Article 3.4.2.1) ................................. 63
8.3.1.2 Deck Overhang Loads......................................................................... 63
8.3.1.2.1 Strength I....................................................................................... 67
8.3.1.2.2 Special Load Combination (Article 3.4.2.1) ................................. 68
8.3.1.3 Flexure (Article 6.10.3.2).................................................................... 69
8.3.1.3.1 Compression Flange: .................................................................... 70
8.3.1.3.2 Tension Flange: ............................................................................. 73
8.3.1.4 Shear (Article 6.10.3.3) ....................................................................... 73
8.3.2 Service Limit State (Article 6.10.4) ...................................................................... 73
8.3.2.1 Elastic Deformations (Article 6.10.4.1) .............................................. 74
8.3.2.2 Permanent Deformations (Article 6.10.4.2) ........................................ 74
iii
8.3.3 Fatigue and Fracture Limit State (Article 6.10.5) ................................................. 75
8.3.3.1 Load Induced Fatigue (Article 6.6.1.2) ............................................... 75
8.3.3.2 Special Fatigue Requirement for Webs (Article 6.10.5.3).................. 76
8.3.4 Strength Limit State (Article 6.10.6) .................................................................... 76
8.3.4.1 Flexure (Article 6.10.6.2).................................................................... 76
8.3.4.2 Ductility Requirement (6.10.7.3) ........................................................ 77
8.3.4.3 Shear (6.10.6.3) ................................................................................... 78
8.4 Cross-frame Design ....................................................................................................... 79
8.4.1 Intermediate Cross-frame Design ......................................................................... 79
8.4.1.1 Bottom Strut ........................................................................................ 80
8.4.1.1.1 Combined Axial Compression and Bending................................. 82
8.4.1.2 Diagonals ............................................................................................ 83
8.4.2 End Cross-frame Design ....................................................................................... 84
8.4.2.1 Top Strut ............................................................................................. 85
8.4.2.1.1 Strength I:...................................................................................... 87
8.4.2.1.2 Strength III: ................................................................................... 90
8.4.2.1.3 Strength V: .................................................................................... 92
8.4.2.2 Diagonals ............................................................................................ 92
8.4.2.2.1 Strength I:...................................................................................... 93
8.4.2.2.2 Strength III: ................................................................................... 93
8.4.2.2.3 Strength V: .................................................................................... 93
8.4.2.2.4 Combined Axial Compression and Flexure .................................. 94
8.5 Stiffener Design ............................................................................................................. 96
8.5.1 Bearing Stiffener Design....................................................................................... 96
8.5.1.1 Projecting Width (Article 6.10.11.2.2) ............................................... 98
8.5.1.2 Bearing Resistance (Article 6.10.11.2.3) ............................................ 98
8.5.1.3 Axial Resistance of Bearing Stiffeners (Article 6.10.11.2.4) ............. 99
8.5.1.4 Bearing Stiffener-to-Web Welds ...................................................... 101
8.6 Flange-to-Web Weld Design ....................................................................................... 101
8.6.1 Steel Section: ...................................................................................................... 102
8.6.2 Long-term Section: ............................................................................................. 102
8.6.3 Short-term Section: ............................................................................................. 102
9.0 References .......................................................................................................................... 105
iv
List of Figures
Figure 1 Sketch of the Typical Bridge Cross Section .................................................................... 2

Figure 2 Sketch of the Superstructure Framing Plan ..................................................................... 3
Figure 3 Sketch of the Girder Elevation ........................................................................................ 4
Figure 4 Sketch of Section 1, Positive Bending Region .............................................................. 14
Figure 5 Sketch of the Truck Location for the Lever Rule .......................................................... 17
Figure 6 Sketch of the Truck Locations for the Special Analysis ............................................... 19
Figure 7 Sketch of Section 2, Negative Bending Region ............................................................ 22
Figure 8 Dead and Live Load Moment Envelopes ...................................................................... 24
Figure 9 Dead and Live Load Shear Envelopes........................................................................... 25
Figure 10 Fatigue Live Load Moments ....................................................................................... 25
Figure 11 Fatigue Live Load Shears ............................................................................................ 26
Figure 12 AASHTO LRFD Moment-Rotation Model................................................................. 52
Figure 13 Determination of Mpe Using Refined Method ............................................................. 53
Figure 14 Determination of Rotation at Pier Assuming No Continuity ...................................... 54
Figure 15 Deck Placement Sequence ........................................................................................... 62
Figure 16 Deck Overhang Bracket Loads .................................................................................... 64
Figure 17 Intermediate Cross Frame............................................................................................ 79
Figure 18 Single Angle for Intermediate Cross Frame ................................................................ 80
Figure 19 End Cross Frame ......................................................................................................... 85
Figure 20 Live load on Top Strut................................................................................................. 87
v
List of Tables
Table 1 Section 1 Steel Only Section Properties ......................................................................... 15

Table 2 Positive Bending Region Distribution Factors (lanes) ................................................... 21
Table 3 Section 2 Steel Only Section Properties ......................................................................... 22
Table 4 Negative Bending Region Distribution Factors .............................................................. 23
Table 5 Unfactored and Undistributed Moments (kip-ft) ............................................................ 26
Table 6 Unfactored and Undistributed Live Load Moments (kip-ft) .......................................... 27
Table 7 Strength I Load Combination Moments (kip-ft) ............................................................. 27
Table 8 Service II Load Combination Moments (kip-ft) ............................................................. 27
Table 9 Unfactored and Undistributed Shears (kip) .................................................................... 28
Table 10 Unfactored and Undistributed Live Load Shears (kip) ................................................. 28
Table 11 Strength I Load Combination Shear (kip)..................................................................... 28
Table 12 Section 1 Short Term Composite (n) Section Properties (Exterior Girder) .................. 32
Table 13 Section 1 Long Term Composite (3n) Section Properties (Exterior Girder) ................ 32
Table 14 Section 2 Short Term Composite (n) Section Properties .............................................. 37
Table 15 Section 2 Long Term Composite (3n) Section Properties ............................................ 37
Table 16 Section 2 Steel Section and Longitudinal Reinforcement Section Properties .............. 38
Table 17 Moments from Deck Placement Analysis (kip-ft) ........................................................ 62
vi
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this example is to illustrate the use of the Seventh Edition of the AASHTO LRFD
Bridge Design Specifications [1], referred to herein as AASHTO LRFD (7th Edition, 2014) for
the design of a continuous steel I-girder bridge. The design process and corresponding
calculations for steel I-girders are the focus of this example, with particular emphasis placed on
illustration of the optional moment redistribution procedures. All aspects of the girder design are
presented, including evaluation of the following: cross-section proportion limits, constructibility,
serviceability, fatigue, and strength requirements. Additionally, the weld design for the web-to-
flange joint of the plate girders is demonstrated along with all applicable components of the
stiffener design and cross-frame design.
The moment redistribution procedures allow for a limited degree of yielding at the interior
supports of continuous-span girders. The subsequent redistribution of moment results in a
decrease in the negative bending moments and a corresponding increase in positive bending
moments. The current moment redistribution procedures utilize the same moment envelopes as
used in a conventional elastic analysis and do not require the use of iterative procedures or
simultaneous equations. The method is similar to the optional provisions in previous AASHTO
specifications that permitted the peak negative bending moments to be decreased by 10% before
performing strength checks of the girder. However, in the present method this empirical
percentage is replaced by a calculated quantity, which is a function of geometric and material
properties of the girder. Furthermore, the range of girders for which moment redistribution is
applicable is expanded compared to previous editions of the specifications, in that girders with
slender webs may now be considered. The result of the use of these procedures is considerable
economical savings. Specifically, inelastic design procedures may offer cost savings by (1)
requiring smaller girder sizes, (2) eliminating the need for cover plates (which have unfavorable
fatigue characteristics) in rolled beams, and (3) reducing the number of flange transitions without
increasing the amount of material required in plate girder designs, leading to both material and,
more significantly, fabrication cost savings.
1
2.0 DESIGN PARAMETERS
The bridge cross-section for the tangent, two-span (90 ft - 90 ft) continuous bridge under
consideration is given below in Figure 1. The example bridge has four plate girders spaced at
10.0 ft and 3.5 ft overhangs. The roadway width is 34.0 ft and is centered over the girders. The
reinforced concrete deck is 8.5 inch thick, including a 0.5 inch integral wearing surface, and has
a 2.0 inch haunch thickness.
The framing plan for this design example is shown in Figure 2. As will be demonstrated
subsequently, the cross frame spacing is governed by constuctibility requirements in positive
bending and by moment redistribution requirements in negative bending.
The structural steel is ASTM A709, Grade 50W, and the concrete is normal weight with a 28-day
compressive strength, fc, of 4.0 ksi. The concrete slab is reinforced with nominal Grade 60
reinforcing steel.
The design specifications are the AASHTO LRFD (7th Edition, 2014) Bridge Design
Specifications. Unless stated otherwise, the specific articles, sections, and equations referenced
throughout this example are contained in these specifications.
The girder design presented herein is based on the premise of providing the same girder design
for both the interior and exterior girders. Thus, the design satisfies the requirements for both
interior and exterior girders. Additionally, the girders are designed assuming composite action
with the concrete slab.
Figure 1 Sketch of the Typical Bridge Cross Section
2
Figure 2 Sketch of the Superstructure Framing Plan
3
3.0 GIRDER GEOMETRY
The girder elevation is shown in Figure 3. As shown in Figure 3, section transitions are provided
at 30% of the span length (27 feet) from the interior pier. The design of the girder from the
abutment to 63 feet from the abutment is primarily based on positive bending moments; thus, this
section of the girder is referred to as either the positive bending region or Section 1
throughout this example. Alternatively, the girder geometry at the pier is controlled by negative
bending moments; consequently the region of the girder extending from 0 to 27 feet on each side
of the pier will be referred to as the negative bending region or Section 2. The rationale used
to develop the cross-sectional geometry of these sections and a demonstration that this geometry
satisfies the cross-section proportion limits specified in Article 6.10.2 is presented herein.
3.1 Web Depth
Selection of appropriate web depth has a significant influence on girder geometry. Thus, initial
consideration should be given to the most appropriate web depth. In the absence of other criteria
the span-to-depth ratios given in Article 2.5.2.6.3 may be used as a starting point for selecting a
web depth. As provided in Table 2.5.2.6.3-1, the minimum depth of the steel I-beam portion of a
continuous-span composite section is 0.027L, where L is the span length. Thus, the minimum
steel depth is computed as follows.
0.027(90 ft)(12 in./ft) = 29.2 inches
Preliminary designs were evaluated for five different web depths satisfying the above
requirement. These web depths varied between 36 inches and 46 inches and in all cases girder
weight decreased as web depth increased. However, the decrease in girder weight became much
less significant for web depths greater than 42 inches.
Figure 3 Sketch of the Girder Elevation
3.2 Web Thickness
The thickness of the web was selected to satisfy shear requirements at the strength limit state
without the need for transverse stiffeners. This resulted in a required web thickness of 0.5 inch at
4
the pier and 0.4375 inch at the abutments. The designer may also want to examine the economy
of using a constant 0.5 inch web throughout.
In developing the preliminary cross-section it should also be verified that the selected
dimensions satisfy the cross-section proportion limits required in Article 6.10.2. The required
web proportions are given in Article 6.10.2.1 where, for webs without longitudinal stiffeners, the
web slenderness is limited to a maximum value of 150.
D
150 Eq. (6.10.2.1.1-1)
tw
Thus, the following calculations demonstrate that Eq. 6.10.2.1.1-1 is satisfied for both the
positive and negative moment regions of the girder, respectively.
D 42
96 150 (satisfied)
t w 0.4375
D 42
84 150 (satisfied)
t w 0.5
3.3 Flange Geometries
The width of the compression flange in the positive bending region was controlled by
constructibility requirements as the flange lateral bending stresses are directly related to the
section modulus of the flange about the y-axis of the girder as well as the cross-frame spacing.
Various cross-frame distances were investigated and the corresponding flange width required to
satisfy constructibility requirements for each case was determined. Based on these efforts it was
determined that a minimum flange width of 14 in. was needed to avoid the use of additional
cross-frames. Thus, this minimum width was used for the top flanges.
All other plate sizes were iteratively selected to satisfy all applicable requirements while
producing the most economical girder design possible. The resulting girder dimensions are
illustrated in Figure 3.
Article 6.10.2.2 specifies four flange proportions limits that must be satisfied. The first of these
is intended to prevent the flange from excessively distorting when welded to the web of the
girder during fabrication.
bf
12.0 Eq. (6.10.2.2-1)
2t f
Evaluation of Eq. 6.10.2.2-1 for each of the three flange sizes used in the example girder is
demonstrated below.
5
bf 14
9.33 12.0 (satisfied)
2t f 2(0.75)
bf 14
2t f 2(1.125)
bf 14
2t f 21.25
The second flange proportion limit that must be satisfied corresponds to the relationship between
the flange width and the web depth. The ratio of the web depth to the flange width significantly
influences the flexural capacity of the member and is limited to a maximum of 6, which is the
maximum value for which the moment capacity prediction equations for steel I-girders are
proven to be valid.
D 42
bf 7.0 Eq. (6.10.2.2-2)
6 6
It is shown below that Eq. 6.10.2.2-2 is satisfied for both flange widths utilized in this design
example.
bf = 14.0 inch (satisfied)

bf = 16.0 inch (satisfied)
Equation 3 of Article 6.10.2.2 limits the thickness of the flange to a minimum of 1.1 times the
web thickness. This requirement is necessary to ensure that some web shear buckling restraint is
provided by the flanges, and that the boundary conditions at the web-flange junction assumed in
the development of the web-bend buckling and flange local buckling resistance equations are
sufficiently accurate.
tf 1.1 tw Eq. (6.10.2.2-3)
Evaluation of Eq. 6.10.2.2-3 for the minimum flange thickness used in combination with each of
the web thicknesses utilized in the example girder is demonstrated below.
t f = t f-min 0.75 1.1(0.4375) 0.48 (satisfied)
t f = t f-min 1.125 1.1(0.5) 0.55 (satisfied)
Equation 6.10.2.2-4 sets limits for designed sections similar to the previsions of previous
specifications. This provision prevents the use of extremely mono-symmetric sections ensuring
more efficient flange proportions and a girder section that is suitable for handling during
erection.
6
I yc
0.1 10 Eq. (6.10.2.2-4)
I yt
where: Iyc = moment of inertia of the compression flange of the steel section about the
vertical axis in the plane of the web (in.4)
Iyt = moment of inertia of the tension flange of the steel section about the vertical
axis in the plane of the web (in.4)
Computing the ratio between the top and bottom flanges for the positive and negative bending
regions, respectively, shows that this requirement is satisfied for the design girder.
(0.75)(14)3 /12 171.5

0.1 0.40 10 (satisfied)
(1.25)(16)3 /12 426.7
(1.125)(14)3 /12 257.25

0.1 0.60 10 (satisfied)
(1.25)(16)3 /12 426.7
7
4.0 LOADS
This example considers all applicable loads acting on the superstructure including dead loads,
live loads, and wind loads as discussed below. In determining the effects of each of these loads,
the approximate methods of analysis specified in Article 4.6.2 are implemented.
4.1 Dead Loads

The dead load, according to Article 3.5.1, is to include the weight of all components of the
structure, appurtenances and utilities, earth cover, wearing surface, future overlays, and planned
widening. Dead loads are divided into two categories: dead load of structural components and
non-structural attachments (DC) and the dead load of wearing surface and utilities (DW).
Alternative load factors are specified for each of these categories of dead load depending on the
load combination under consideration.
4.1.1 Component Dead Load (DC)
For composite girders consideration is given to the fact that not all dead loads are applied to the
composite section and the DC dead load is separated into two parts: the dead load acting on the
section before the concrete deck is hardened or made composite (DC1), and the dead load acting
on the composite section (DC2). DC1 is assumed to be carried by the steel section alone. DC2 is
assumed to be carried by the long-term composite section. In the positive bending region the
long-term composite section is comprised of the steel girder and an effective width of the
concrete slab. Formulas are given in the specifications to determine the effective slab width over
which a uniform stress distribution may be assumed. The effective width of the concrete slab is
transformed into an equivalent area of steel by dividing the width by the ratio between the steel
modulus and one-third the concrete modulus, or a modular ratio of 3n. The reduced concrete
modulus is intended to account for the effects of concrete creep. In the negative bending region
at the strength limit state, the composite section is comprised of the steel section and the
longitudinal steel reinforcing within the effective width of the slab. At the fatigue and service
limit states, the concrete deck may be considered effective in both negative and positive bending
for loads applied to the composite section if certain conditions are met.
DC1 includes the girder self-weight, weight of the concrete slab (including the haunch and deck
overhang taper if present), deck forms, cross-frames, and stiffeners. The unit weight for steel
(0.490 k/ft3) used in this example is taken from Table 3.5.1-1, which provides approximate unit
weights of various materials. Table 3.5.1-1 also lists the unit weight of normal weight concrete as
0.145 k/ft3; the concrete unit weight is increased to 0.150 k/ft3 in this example to account for the
additional weight of the steel reinforcement within the concrete. The dead load of the stay-in-
place forms is assumed to be 15 psf. To account for the dead load of the cross-frames, stiffeners
and other miscellaneous steel details, a dead load of 0.015 k/ft is assumed. It is also assumed that
these dead loads are equally distributed to all girders as permitted by Article 4.6.2.2.1 for the
line-girder type of analysis implemented herein. Thus, the total DC1 loads used in this design are
as computed below.
8
Slab = (8.5/12) x (37) x (0.150)/4 = 0.983 k/ft
Haunch (average wt/length) = 0.017 k/ft
Overhang taper = 2 x (1/2) x [3.5-(7/12)] x (2/12) x 0.150/4 = 0.018 k/ft
Girder (average wt/length) = 0.174 k/ft
Cross-frames and misc. steel = 0.015 k/ft
Stay-in-place forms = 0.015 x (30-3 x (12/12))/4 = 0.101 k/ft
Total DC1 =1.308 k/ft
DC2 is composed of the weight from the barriers, medians, and sidewalks. No sidewalks or
medians are present in this example and thus the DC2 weight is equal to the barrier weight alone.
The barrier weight is assumed to be equal to 520 lb/ft. Article 4.6.2.2.1 specifies that when
approximate methods of analysis are applied DC2 may be equally distributed to all girders, or a
larger proportion of the concrete barriers may be applied to the exterior girder which represents a
more realistic distribution of these loads acting out on the deck overhangs. In this example, the
barrier weight is equally distributed to all girders, resulting in the DC2 loads computed below.
Barriers = (0.520 x 2)/4 = 0.260 k/ft
DC2 = 0.260 k/ft
4.1.2 Wearing Surface Dead Load (DW)
Similar to the DC2 loads, the dead load of the future wearing surface is applied to the long-term
composite section and is assumed to be equally distributed to each girder. A future wearing
surface with a dead load of 25 psf is assumed. Multiplying this unit weight by the roadway width
and dividing by the number of girders gives the following.
Wearing surface = (0.025) x (34)/4 = 0.213 k/ft
DW = 0.213 k/ft
4.2 Vehicular Live Loads
The AASHTO LRFD (7th Edition, 2014) Specifications consider live loads to consist of gravity
loads, wheel load impact (dynamic load allowance), braking forces, centrifugal forces, and
vehicular collision forces. Live loads are applied to the short-term composite section. In positive
bending regions, the short-term composite section is comprised of the steel girder and the
effective width of the concrete slab, which is converted into an equivalent area of steel by
dividing the width by the modular ratio, or the ratio of the elastic moduli of the steel and the
concrete. In other words, a modular ratio of n is used for short-term loads where creep effects are
9
not relevant. In negative bending regions at the strength limit state, the short-term composite
section consists of the steel girder and the longitudinal reinforcing steel, At the fatigue and
service limit states, the concrete deck may be considered effective in both negative and positive
bending if certain conditions are met.
4.2.1 General Vehicular Live Load (Article 3.6.1.2)
The AASHTO LRFD (7th Edition, 2014) vehicular live loading is designated as the HL-93
loading and is a combination of the design truck or tandem plus the design lane load. The design
truck, specified in Article 3.6.1.2.2, is composed of an 8-kip lead axle spaced 14 feet from the
closer of two 32-kip rear axles, which have a variable axle spacing of 14 feet to 30 feet. The
transverse spacing of the wheels is 6 feet. The design truck occupies a 10 feet lane width and is
positioned within the design lane to produce the maximum force effects, but may be no closer
than 2 feet from the edge of the design lane, except for the design of the deck overhang.
The design tandem, specified in Article 3.6.1.2.3, is composed of a pair of 25-kip axles spaced 4
feet apart. The transverse spacing of the wheels is 6 feet.
The design lane load is discussed in Article 3.6.1.2.4 and has a magnitude of 0.64 klf uniformly
distributed in the longitudinal direction. In the transverse direction, the load occupies a 10 foot
width. The lane load is positioned to produce extreme force effects, and therefore, need not be
applied continuously.
For both negative moments between points of contraflexure and interior pier reactions a special
loading is used. The loading consists of two design trucks (as described above but with the
magnitude of 90% the axle weights) in addition to 90% of the lane loading. The trucks must have
a minimum headway of 50 feet between the two loads. The live load moments between the
points of dead load contraflexure are to be taken as the larger of the moments caused by the HL-
93 loading or the special loading.
Live load shears are to be calculated only from the HL-93 loading, except for interior pier
reactions, which are to be taken as the larger of the reactions due to the HL-93 loading or the
special loading.
The dynamic load allowance, which accounts for the dynamic effects of force amplification, is
only applied to the truck portion of the live loading, and not the lane load. For the strength and
service limit states, the dynamic load allowance is taken as 33 percent, and for the fatigue limit
state, the dynamic load allowance is taken as 15 percent.
4.2.2 Optional Live Load Deflection Load (Article 3.6.1.3.2)
The loading for the optional live load deflection criterion consists of the greater of the design
truck, or 25 percent of the design truck plus the lane load. A dynamic load allowance of 33
percent applies to the truck portions (axle weights) of these load cases. During this check, all
design lanes are to be loaded, and the assumption is made for straight-girder bridges that all
components deflect equally.
10
4.2.3 Fatigue Load (Article 3.6.1.4)
For checking the fatigue limit state, a single design truck with a constant rear axle spacing of 30
feet is applied.
4.3 Wind Loads
Article 3.8.1.2 discusses the design horizontal wind pressure, PD, which is used to determine the
wind load on the structure. The wind pressure is computed as follows:
2
VDZ
PD PB Eq. (3.8.1.2.1-1)
10,000
where:
PB = base wind pressure of 0.050 ksf for beams (Table 3.8.1.2.1-1)
VDZ = design wind velocity at design elevation, Z (mph)
In this example it is assumed the superstructure is less than 30 feet above the ground, at which
the wind velocity is prescribed to equal 100 mph, which is designated as the base wind velocity,
VB. With VDZ equal to the base wind velocity of 100 in Eq. 3.8.1.2.1-1 the horizontal wind
pressure, PD, is determined as follows.
1002
PD 0.050 0.050ksf
10,000
4.4 Load Combinations
The specifications define four limit states: the service limit state, the fatigue and fracture limit
state, the strength limit state, and the extreme event limit state. The subsequent sections discuss
each limit state in more detail; however for all limit states the following general equation from
Article 1.3.2.1 must be satisfied, where different combinations of loads (i.e., dead load, wind
load) are specified for each limit state.
DR Ii Qi Rn = Rr
where:
D = Ductility factor (Article 1.3.3)

R = Redundancy factor (Article 1.3.4)
I = Operational importance factor (Article 1.3.5)
i = Load factor
Qi = Force effect
= Resistance factor
Rn = Nominal resistance
Rr = Factored resistance
11
The factors relating to ductility and redundancy are related to the configuration of the structure,
while the operational importance factor is related to the consequence of the bridge being out of
service. The product of the three factors results in the load modifier, and is limited to the
range between 0.95 and 1.00. In this example, the ductility, redundancy, and operational
importance factors are each assigned a value equal to one. The load factors are given in Tables
3.4.1-1 and 3.4.1-2 of the specifications and the resistance factors for the design of steel
members are given in Article 6.5.4.2.
When evaluating the strength of the structure during construction, the load factor for construction
loads, for equipment and for dynamic effects (i.e. temporary dead and/or live loads that act on
the structure during construction) is not to be taken less than 1.5 in the Strength I load
combination (Article 3.4.2). Also, the load factor for any non-integral wearing surface and
utility loads may be reduced from 1.5 to 1.25 when evaluating the construction condition. The
load factor for wind may be reduced to not less than 1.25 when checking the Strength III load
combination during construction (Article 3.4.2). Also, for evaluating the construction condition,
the load factor for temporary dead loads that act on the structure during construction is not to be
taken less than 1.25 and the load factor for any non-integral wearing surface and utility loads
may be reduced from 1.5 to 1.25.
Article 3.4.2.1 further states that unless otherwise specified by the Owner, primary steel
superstructure components are to be investigated for maximum force effects during construction
for an additional load combination consisting of the applicable DC loads and any construction
loads that are applied to the fully erected steelwork. For this additional load combination, the
load factor for DC and construction loads including dynamic effects (if applicable) is not to be
taken less than 1.4. For steel superstructures, the use of higher-strength steels, composite
construction, and limit-states design approaches in which smaller factors are applied to dead load
force effects than in previous service-load design approaches, have generally resulted in lighter
members overall. To ensure adequate stability and strength of primary steel superstructure
components during construction, an additional strength limit state load combination is specified
for the investigation of loads applied to the fully erected steelwork (i.e., for investigation of the
deck placement sequence and deck overhang effects).
12
5.0 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS
The AASHTO LRFD (7th Edition, 2014) specifications allow the designer to use either
approximate (e.g., line girder) or refined (e.g., grid or finite element) analysis methods to
determine force effects; the acceptable methods of analysis are detailed in Section 4 of the
specifications. In this design example, the line girder approach is employed to determine the
girder moment and shear envelopes. Using the line girder approach, vehicular live load force
effects are determined by first computing the force effects due to a single truck or loaded lane
and then by multiplying these forces by multiple presence factors, live-load distribution factors,
and dynamic load allowance factors as detailed below.
5.1 Multiple Presence Factors (Article 3.6.1.1.2)
Multiple presence factors account for the probability of multiple lanes on the bridge being loaded
simultaneously. These factors are specified for various numbers of loaded lanes in Table
3.6.1.1.2-1 of the specifications. There are two exceptions when multiple presence factors are not
to be applied. These are when (1) distribution factors are calculated using the tabulated empirical
equations given in Article 4.6.2.2 as these equations are already adjusted to account for multiple
presence effects and (2) when determining fatigue truck moments, since the fatigue analysis is
only specified for a single truck. Thus, for the present example, the multiple presence factors are
only applicable when distribution factors are computed using the lever rule or the special
analysis for the exterior girders at the strength and service limit states as demonstrated below.
5.2 Live-Load Distribution Factors (Article 4.6.2.2)
The distribution factors approximate the amount of live load (i.e., percentage of a truck or lane
load) distributed to a given girder. These factors are computed based on a combination of
empirical equations and simplified analysis procedures. Empirical equations are provided in
Article 4.6.2.2.1 of the specifications and are specifically developed based on the location of the
girder (i.e. interior or exterior), the force effect considered (i.e., moment or shear), and the bridge
type. These equations are valid only if specific parameters of the bridge are within the ranges
specified in the tables given in Article 4.6.2.2.1. If the limits are not satisfied, a more refined
analysis must be performed. This design example satisfies all limits for use of the empirical
distribution factors, and therefore, the analysis using the approximate equations follows.
Distribution factors are a function of the girder spacing, slab thickness, span length, and the
stiffness of the girder, which depends on the proportions of the section. Since the factor depends
on girder proportions that are not initially known, the stiffness term may be assumed to be equal
to one for preliminary design. In this section, calculation of the distribution factors is presented
based on the girder proportions previously shown in Figure 3.
5.2.1 Live-Load Lateral Distribution Factors Positive Flexure
In positive bending regions, the stiffness parameter required for the distribution factor equations,
Kg, is determined based on the cross section in Figure 4.
13
Kg = n(I + Aeg2) Eq. (4.6.2.2.1-1)
where:
n = modular ratio
I = moment of inertia of the steel girder
A = area of the steel girder
eg = distance between the centroid of the girder and centroid of the slab
The required section properties of the girder (in addition to other section properties that will be
relevant for subsequent calculations) are determined as follows.
eg = 8.0 / 2 + 2.0 + 26.01 - 0.75 = 31.26 in.
n=8
Kg = n(I + Aeg2) = 8(15,969 + 48.88(31.26)2) = 509,871 in.4
Figure 4 Sketch of Section 1, Positive Bending Region
14
Table 1 Section 1 Steel Only Section Properties
5.2.1.1 Interior Girder Strength and Service Limit States
For interior girders, computation of the distribution factors for the strength and service limit
states is based on the empirical equations given in Article 4.6.2.2.2 as described below.
5.2.1.1.1 Bending Moment
The empirical equations for distribution of live load moment at the strength and service limit
states are given in Table 4.6.2.2.2b-1. Alternative expressions are given for one loaded lane and
multiple loaded lanes, where the maximum of the two equations governs as shown below. It is
noted that the maximum number of lanes possible for the 34 feet roadway width considered in
this example is two lanes.
0.1
S S Kg
0.4 0.3
DF 0.06 3
for one-lane loaded
14 L 12.0 Lts
where:
S = girder spacing
L = span length
ts = slab thickness
Kg = stiffness term
0.1
0.4
10.0 10.0
0.3
509871
DF = 0.06 = 0.508 lanes
14 90 12.0 90 8.0 3

15
0.1
S S Kg
0.6 0.2
DF 0.075
3 for two or more lanes loaded
9.5 L 12.0Lt
0.1
0.6
10.0 10.0
0.2
509871
DF = 0.075 0.734lanes (governs)
9.5 90 12.0 90 8.0
3

Thus, the controlling distribution factor for moment of an interior girder in the positive moment
region at the strength or service limit state is 0.734 lanes.
5.2.1.1.2 Shear
The empirical equations for distribution of live load shear in an interior girder at the strength and
service limit states are given in Table 4.6.2.2.3a-1. Similar to the equations for moment given
above, alternative expressions are given based on the number of loaded lanes.
S
DF = 0.36 for one lane loaded
25.0
10.0
DF = 0.36 = 0.760 lanes
25.0
2
S S
DF = 0.2 for two or more lanes loaded
12 35
2
10.0 10.0
DF = 0.2 = 0.952 lanes (governs)
12 35
5.2.1.2 Exterior Girder Strength and Service Limit States
The live load distribution factors for an exterior girder for checking the strength limit state are
determined as the governing factors calculated using a combination of the lever rule,
approximate formulas, and a special analysis assuming that the entire cross section deflects and
rotates as a rigid cross-section. Each method is illustrated below.
Lever Rule:
As specified in Table 4.6.2.2.2d-1, the lever rule is one method used to determine the distribution
factor for the exterior girder for the case of one-lane loaded. The lever rule assumes the deck is
hinged at the interior girder, and statics is employed to determine the percentage of the truck
weight resisted by the exterior girder, i.e., the distribution factor. It is specified that the truck is to
be placed such that the closest wheel is two feet from the barrier or curb, which results in the
truck position shown in Figure 5 for the present example. The calculated reaction of the exterior
16
girder is multiplied by the multiple presence factor for one lane loaded, m1, to determine the
distribution factor.
10 6
DF = 0.5 0.5 m1
10
m1 = 1.20 (from Table 3.6.1.1.2-1)
DF = 0.7 x 1.2 = 0.840 lanes
Figure 5 Sketch of the Truck Location for the Lever Rule
Modified Interior Girder Distribution Factor:

For the case of two or more lanes loaded, a modification factor, e, to be applied to the
distribution factor for the interior girder is found in Table 4.6.2.2.2d-1 and is given below.
de
e = 0.77 +
9.1
In the above equation de is the distance between the center of the exterior girder and the interior
face of the barrier or curb in feet. Thus, for the present example de is equal to 2.
2.0
e = 0.77 + = 0.990
9.1
Modifying the interior girder distribution factor for moment for the case of two or more lanes
loaded by the factor, e, gives the following:
DF = 0.990(0.734) = 0.727 lanes
17
Special Analysis:
The special analysis assumes the entire bridge cross-section behaves as a rigid cross-section
rotating about the transverse centerline of the structure and is discussed in the commentary of
Article 4.6.2.2.2d. The reaction on the exterior beam is calculated from the following equation:
NL
N X e
R L Next Eq. (C4.6.2.2.2d-1)
Nb b
x2
where:
NL = number of lanes loaded
Nb = number of beams or girders
Xext = horizontal distance from center of gravity of the pattern of girders to the exterior
girder (ft.)
e = eccentricity of a design truck or a design lane load from the center of gravity of
the pattern of girders (ft.)
x = horizontal distance from the center of gravity of the pattern of girders to each
girder (ft.)
Figure 6 shows the truck locations for the special analysis. Here it is shown that the maximum
number of trucks that may be placed on half of the cross-section is two. Thus, the calculation of
the distribution factors using the special analysis procedure for one loaded lane and two loaded
lanes proceeds as follows (the appropriate multiple presence factors, MPF, that are applied in
each case are shown):
1 (15)(12)
DF 1.2 = 0.732 for one lane loaded (Note, MPF = 1.2)
4 2 (15) 2 (5) 2

2 (15)(12 0)
DF 1.0 = 0.860 for two lanes loaded (Note, MPF = 1.0)
4 2 (15) 2 (5) 2

DF = 0.860 governs
Based on the computations for the exterior girder distribution factors for moment in the positive
bending region shown above, it is determined that the controlling factor for this case is equal to
0.860 lanes, which is based on the special analysis with two lanes loaded. Compared to the
interior girder distribution factor for moment in the positive bending region, which was
computed to be 0.734 lanes, it is shown that the exterior girder distribution factor is larger, and
18
therefore controls the bending strength design at the strength and service limit states in the
positive bending region.
Figure 6 Sketch of the Truck Locations for the Special Analysis
5.2.1.2.2 Shear
The distribution factors computed above using the lever rule, approximate formulas, and special
analysis are also applicable to the distribution of shear.
Lever Rule:
The above computations demonstrate that for the case of one-lane loaded the distribution factor
is equal to 0.840 lanes based on the lever rule.
DF = 0.840 lanes
Modified Interior Girder Distribution Factor:

For the case of two or more lanes loaded, the shear modification factor is computed using the
following formula, Table 4.6.2.2.3b-1:
de
e 0.60
10.0
2
e 0.60 0.800 lanes
10.0
Applying this modification factor to the previously computed interior girder distribution
factorfor shear for two or more lanes loaded gives the following:
19
DF = 0.800(0.952) = 0.762 lanes
Special Analysis:
It was demonstrated above that the special analysis yields the following distribution factors for
one lane and two or more lanes loaded, respectively:
DF = 0.732 lanes
DF = 0.860 lanes (governs)
Thus, the controlling distribution factor for shear in the positive bending region of the exterior
girder is 0.860 lanes, which is less than that of the interior girder. Thus, the interior girder
distribution factor of 0.952 lanes controls the shear design in the positive bending region.
5.2.1.3 Fatigue Limit State
As stated in Article 3.6.1.1.2, the fatigue distribution factor is based on one lane loaded, and does
not include the multiple presence factor, since the fatigue loading is specified as a single truck
load. Because the distribution factors calculated from the tabulated empirical equations
incorporate the multiple presence factors, the fatigue distribution factors are equal to the strength
distribution factors divided by the multiple presence factor for one lane loaded, as described
subsequently.
Upon reviewing the moment distribution factors for one lane loaded computed above, it is
determined that the maximum distribution factor results from the lever rule calculations.
Dividing this distribution factor of 0.840 lanes by the multiple presence factor for one lane
loaded results in the following distribution factor for fatigue moment in the positive bending
region.
Exterior Girder, DF = 0.840 / 1.20 = 0.700 lanes
Interior Girder, DF = 0.508 / 1.20 = 0.423 lanes
5.2.1.3.2 Shear
Similarly, based on the above distribution factors for shear due to one lane loaded, the
controlling distribution factor is calculated by again dividing the lever rule distribution factor by
the multiple presence factor.
Exterior Girder, DF = 0.840 / 1.20 = 0.700 lanes
Interior Girder, DF = 0.760 / 1.20 = 0.633 lanes
20
5.2.1.4 Distribution Factor for Live-Load Deflection
Article 2.5.2.6.2 states that all design lanes must be loaded when determining the live load
deflection of the structure. In the absence of a refined analysis, for straight-girder bridges, an
approximation of the live load deflection can be obtained by using a distribution factor computed
assuming that all girders deflect equally with the appropriate multiple presence factor applied.
The controlling case occurs when two lanes are loaded, and the calculation of the corresponding
distribution factor is shown below.
NL 2
DF = m 1.0 0.500lanes
Nb 4
Table 2 summarizes the governing distribution factors for the positive bending region.
Table 2 Positive Bending Region Distribution Factors (lanes)
5.2.2 Live-Load Lateral Distribution Factors Negative Flexure
Many of the distribution factors are the same in both the positive and negative bending regions.
This section demonstrates the computation of the distribution factors that are unique to the
negative bending region. Specifically, the distribution factor for bending moment in the interior
girder at the strength and service limit states is directly influenced by to the girder proportions.
As in the above calculations for the positive moment region, this process begins with
determining the stiffness parameter, Kg, of the section. The cross section for the negative
bending region is shown in Figure 7. The section properties of the girder are determined as
follows.
21
Figure 7 Sketch of Section 2, Negative Bending Region
Table 3 Section 2 Steel Only Section Properties
eg = 8.0 / 2 +2.0 + 23.76 1.125 = 28.64 in.
n=8
Kg = n(I + Aeg2) = 8(19,616 + 56.75(28.64)2) = 529,321 in.4
As discussed above, the distribution factors for bending moment in interior girders at the strength
and service limit states are computed based on the tabulated empirical equations given in Article
4.6.2.2.2.
The applicable equations for moment distribution factors from Table 4.6.2.2.2b-1 are as shown
below.
22
0.1
S S Kg
0.4 0.3
DF 0.06 3
for one lane loaded
14 L 12.0 Lts
0.1

0.4 0.3
10.0 10.0
529,321
= 0.510 lanes
DF 0.06 3
14 90.0 12.090.08.0
0.1
S S K g
0.6 0.2
DF 0.075 for two or more lanes loaded

9.5 L 12.0Lt S
3
0.2 0.1
10.0
0.6
10.0 529,321
DF 0.075 = 0.737 lanes
9.5 90.0 12.090.08.03

Table 4 summarizes the distribution factors for the negative bending region, where it is shown
that the exterior girder controls all aspects of the design except for shear at the strength and
service limit states.
Table 4 Negative Bending Region Distribution Factors
5.2.3 Dynamic Load Allowance
The dynamic effects of the truck loading are taken into consideration by the dynamic load
allowance, IM. The dynamic load allowance, which is discussed in Article 3.6.2 of the
specifications, accounts for the hammering effect of the wheel assembly and the dynamic
response of the bridge. IM is only applied to the design truck or tandem, not the lane loading.
Table 3.6.2.1-1 specifies IM equal to 1.33 for the strength, service, and live load deflection
evaluations, while IM of 1.15 is specified for the fatigue limit state.
23
6.0 ANALYSIS RESULTS
6.1 Moment and Shear Envelopes
Figures 8 through 11 show the moment and shear envelopes for this design example, which are
based on the data presented in Tables 5 through 11. These figures show distributed moments for
the exterior girder and distributed shears for an interior girder, which are the controlling girders
for each force effect, based on the distribution factors computed above. For loads applied to the
composite section, the envelopes shown are determined based on the composite section
properties assuming the concrete deck to be effective over the entire span length.
As previously mentioned, the live load in the positive bending region between the points of dead
load contraflexure is the result of the HL-93 loading. In the negative bending region between the
points of dead load contraflexure, the moments are the larger of the moments due to the HL-93
loading and the special negative-moment loading, which is composed of 90 percent of both the
truck-train moment and lane loading moment.
Figure 8 Dead and Live Load Moment Envelopes
24
Figure 9 Dead and Live Load Shear Envelopes
Figure 10 Fatigue Live Load Moments
25
Figure 11 Fatigue Live Load Shears
Table 5 Unfactored and Undistributed Moments (kip-ft)
26
Table 6 Unfactored and Undistributed Live Load Moments (kip-ft)
Table 7 Strength I Load Combination Moments (kip-ft)
Table 8 Service II Load Combination Moments (kip-ft)
27
Table 9 Unfactored and Undistributed Shears (kip)
Table 10 Unfactored and Undistributed Live Load Shears (kip)
Table 11 Strength I Load Combination Shear (kip)
28
6.2 Live Load Deflection
As indicated in Article 3.6.1.3.2, control of live-load deflection is optional. Evaluation of this

criterion is based on the flexural rigidity of the short-term composite section and consists of two
load cases: deflection due to the design truck, and deflection due to the design lane plus 25
percent of the design truck. The dynamic load allowance of 33 percent is applied to the design
truck load only for both loading conditions. For this example, the live load is distributed using a
distribution factor of 0.500 lanes calculated earlier.
The maximum deflection due to the design truck is 0.917 inches. Applying the impact and
distribution factors gives the following.
LL+IM = 0.500 x 1.33 x 0.917 = 0.610 in. (governs)
The maximum deflection due to lane load only is 0.475 inches. Therefore, the deflection due to
25% of the design truck plus the lane loading is equal to the following:
LL+IM = 0.500 (1.33 x 0.25 x 0.917 + 0.475) = 0.390 in.
Thus the governing deflection equal to 0.610 inch will be used to assess the girder design based
on the live-load deflection criterion.
29
7.0 LIMIT STATES
As discussed previously, there are four limit states applicable to the design of steel I-girders.
Each of these limit states is described below.
7.1 Service Limit State (Articles 1.3.2.2 and 6.5.2)
The intent of the Service Limit State is to ensure the satisfactory performance and rideability of
the bridge structure by preventing localized yielding. For steel members, these objectives are
intended to be satisfied by limiting the maximum levels of stress that are permissible. The
optional live-load deflection criterion is also included in the service limit state and is intended to
ensure user comfort.
7.2 Fatigue and Fracture Limit State (Article 1.3.2.3 and 6.5.3)
The intent of the Fatigue and Fracture Limit State is to control crack growth under cyclic
loading. This is accomplished by limiting the stress range to which steel members are subjected.
The permissible stress range varies for various design details and member types. The fatigue
limit state also restricts the out-of-plane flexing of the web. Additionally, fracture toughness
requirements are stated in Article 6.6.2 of the specifications and are dependent on the
temperature zone.
7.3 Strength Limit State (Articles 1.3.2.4 and 6.5.4)
The strength limit state ensures the design is stable and has adequate strength when subjected to
the highest load combinations considered. The bridge structure may experience structural
damage (e.g., permanent deformations) at the strength limit state, but the integrity of the
structure is preserved.
The suitability of the design must also be investigated to ensure adequate strength and stability
during each construction phase. The deck casting sequence has a significant influence on the
distribution of stresses within the structure. Therefore, the deck casting sequence should be
considered in the design and specified on the plans to ensure uniformity between predicted and
actual stresses. In addition, lateral flange bending stresses resulting from forces applied to the
overhang brackets during construction should also be considered during the constructibility
evaluation.
7.4 Extreme Event Limit State (Articles 1.3.2.5 and 6.5.5)
The extreme event limit state is to ensure the structure can survive a collision, earthquake, or
flood. The collisions investigated under this limit state include the bridge being struck by a
vehicle, vessel, or ice flow. This limit state is not addressed in this design example.
30
8.0 SAMPLE CALCULATIONS
This example presents sample calculations for the design of positive and negative bending
sections of the girders for the strength, fatigue and fracture, and service limit states. In addition,
calculations evaluating the constructibility of the bridge system are included and the optional
provisions for moment redistribution are presented. Also presented are the cross-frame design,
stiffener design, and weld design. The moment and shear envelopes provided in Figs. 8 through
11 are referenced in the following calculations.
8.1 Section Properties
The section properties for Section 1 and Section 2 are first calculated and will be routinely used
in the subsequent evaluations of the various code checks. The structural slab thickness is taken as
the slab thickness minus the thickness of the integral wearing surface (8 inches) and the modular
ratio (n) is taken to be 8 in these calculations.
8.1.1 Section 1 Positive Bending Region
Section 1 represents the positive bending region and was previously shown in Figure 4. The
longitudinal reinforcement is neglected in the computation of these section properties.
8.1.1.1 Effective Flange Width (Article 4.6.2.6)
Article 4.6.2.6 of the AASHTO LRFD (7th Edition, 2014) Specifications governs the
determination of the effective flange width of the concrete slab when designing composite
sections.
For the interior girders of this example, beff in the positive bending region is determined as one-
half the distance to the adjacent girder on each side of the girder being analyzed.
120 120
b eff 120.0in.
2 2
For the exterior girders of this example, beff in the positive bending region is determined as one-
half the distance to the adjacent girder plus the full overhang width.
120
b eff 42 102.0in.
2
The exterior girder has both a smaller effective width and a larger live load distribution factor
than the interior girder; therefore the moment design of the positive bending region is controlled
by the exterior girder.
31
8.1.1.2 Elastic Section Properties: Section 1
As discussed above, the section properties considered in the analysis of the girder vary based on
the loading conditions. Specifically, live loads are applied to the short-term composite section,
where the modular ratio of 8 is used in the computations. Alternatively, dead loads are applied to
the long-term composite section. The long-term composite section accounts for the reduction in
strength that may occur in the deck over time due to creep effects. This is reflected in the section
property calculations through use of a modular ratio equal to 3 times the typical modular ratio
(3n), or in this example, 24. The effective width of the deck is divided by the appropriate
modular ratio for each case in the determination of the composite section properties. The section
properties for the short-term and long-term composite sections are computed below, in Tables 12
and 13. Recall that the section properties for the steel section (girder alone) were previously
computed for the purpose of determining live load distribution factors.
Table 12 Section 1 Short Term Composite (n) Section Properties (Exterior Girder)
Table 13 Section 1 Long Term Composite (3n) Section Properties (Exterior Girder)
32
8.1.1.3 Plastic Moment: Section 1
The plastic moment Mp is the resisting moment of an assumed fully-yielded cross-section and
may be determined for sections in positive flexure using the procedure outlined in Table D6.1-1
as demonstrated below. The longitudinal deck reinforcement is conservatively neglected in these
computations. The plastic forces acting in the slab (Ps), compression flange (Pc), web (Pw), and
tension flange (Pt) are first computed.
Ps = 0.85fcbsts = 0.85(4.0)(102)(8) = 2,774 kips
Pc = Fycbctc = (50)(14)(0.75) = 525 kips
Pw = FywDtw = (50)(42)(0.4375) = 919 kips
Pt = Fytbttt = (50)(16)(1.25) = 1,000 kips
The plastic forces for each element of the girder are then compared to determine the location of
the plastic neutral axis (PNA). The position of the PNA is determined by equilibrium; i.e., no net
axial force when considering the summation of plastic forces. Table D.6.1-1 provides seven
cases, with accompanying conditions for use, to determine the location of the PNA and
subsequently calculate the plastic moment.
Following the conditions set forth in Table D6.1-1, the PNA is generally located as follows:
CASE I
Pt + Pw P c + Ps
1,000 + 919 525 + 2,774
1,919 < 3,299 Therefore, PNA is not in the web
CASE II
Pt + Pw + P c Ps
1,000 + 919 + 525 2,774
2,774 kips < 2,611 kips Therefore,PNA is not in the top flange
Therefore, the plastic neutral axis is in the concrete deck and y is computed using the following
equation derived from that provided in Table D6.1-1 when deck reinforcement is ignored:
P +P +P
y = (t s ) c w t
Ps
33
525 919 1000
y 8.0 7.05 inches from the top of the concrete slab
2774
The plastic moment Mp is then calculated using the following equation derived from that
provided in Table D6.1-1 when deck reinforcement is ignored.
y2 P
Mp = s
+ Pc d c +Pw d w +Pt d t
2t s

The distance from the PNA to the centroid of the compression flange, web, and tension flange
(respectively) is as follows:
dc = 8.0 + 2.0 0.5(0.75) - 7.05 = 2.575 in.
dw = 8.0 + 2.0 + 0.5(42.0) 7.05 = 23.95 in.
dt = 8.0 + 2.0 + 42.0 + 0.5(1.25) 7.05 = 45.013 in.
Substitution of these distances and the above computed plastic forces, into the preceding
equation, gives the following:
7.052 2774
M p 5252.575 91923.95 100045.013
28 .0

Mp = 76,992 k-in = 6,416 k-ft.
8.1.1.4 Yield Moment: Section 1
The yield moment, which is the moment causing first yield in either flange (neglecting flange
lateral bending), is determined according to the provisions specified in Article D6.2.2 of the
specifications. This computation method for the yield moment recognizes that different stages of
loading (e.g. composite dead load, non-composite dead load, and live load) act on the girder
when different cross-sectional properties are applicable. The yield moment is determined by
solving for MAD using Equation D6.2.2-1 (given below) and then summing MD1, MD2, and MAD,
where, MD1, MD2, and MAD are the factored moments applied to the noncomposite, long-term
composite, and short-term composite section, respectively.
M D1 M D 2 M AD
Fyt Eq. (D6.2.2-1)
S NC S LT SST
Due to the significantly higher section modulus of the short-term composite section about the top
flange, compared to the short-term composite section modulus taken about the bottom flange, the
minimum yield moment results when using the bottom flange section moduli.
34
Computation of the yield moment for the bottom flange is thus demonstrated below. First the
known quantities are substituted into Equation D6.2.2-1 to solve for MAD.
1.2573812 1.25147 12 1.5012012 M AD

50 1.0
887.7 1,159 1,248
MAD = 42,136 k-in. = 3,511 k-ft.
My is then determined by applying the applicable load factors and summing the dead loads and
MAD.
My = 1.25(738) + 1.25(147) + 1.50(120) + 3,511 = 4,797 k-ft Eq. (D6.2.2-2)
8.1.2 Section 2 Negative Bending Region
This section details the calculations to determine the section properties of the composite girder in
the negative bending region, which was previously shown in Figure 7.
8.1.2.1 Effective Flange Width (Article 4.6.2.6)
As discussed previously, the effective flange width for interior girders is computed as one-half
the distance to the adjacent girder one each side of the girder being analyzed.
120 120
b eff 120.0in.
2 2
For an exterior girder, beff is determined as one-half the distance to the adjacent girder plus the
full overhang width.
120
b eff 42 102.0in.
2
8.1.2.2 Minimum Negative Flexure Concrete Deck Reinforcement (Article 6.10.1.7)
The total area of the longitudinal reinforcement, provided in negative bending regions, is not to
be less than one percent of the total cross-sectional area of the concrete deck. This provision is
intended to control cracking of the concrete deck in regions where the tensile stress due to the
factored construction loads or the Service II load exceeds fr, which is often the case in negative
bending regions. (fr is the modulus of rupture of the concrete and is to be taken equal to
0.24(fr)0.5 for normal weight concrete, with taken equal to 0.90).
The total area of the concrete deck in this example is computed as follows.
35
A deck
8.0
37.0 2 1 1 2.0 0.75 3.5 14 2 24.97 ft 2 3,596 in.2
12 2 12 12
The minimum area of reinforcing steel required is taken as:
0.01(3,596) = 35.96 in.2
Reinforcement is to be distributed uniformly across the deck width. The area of reinforcement
required within the effective width (102 inches) of an exterior girder is determined as shown
below.
35.96 in. 2
0.97 in. 2 ft
37.0 ft
0.97(102 / 12) = 8.25 in.2
8.32 in2 of longitudinal reinforcement is provided. This reinforcement should be placed in two
layers with two-thirds of the reinforcement in the top layer and the remaining one-third placed in
the bottom layer. Therefore, the area of the top reinforcement is 5.55 in2 and the area of the
bottom reinforcement is 2.77 in2. Additionally, the reinforcement should not use bar sizes
exceeding No. 6 bars or bar spacings exceeding 12.0 inches. The reinforcement must have a
specified minimum yield strength not less than 60 ksi.
8.1.2.3 Elastic Section Properties: Section 2
Similar to the computation of section properties presented above for Section 1, section properties
for the short-term and long-term composite sections in Section 2 are presented below. Section
properties are computed assuming the concrete is effective in tension (for potential use at the
fatigue and service limit states), and also for the section consisting of the girder and reinforcing
steel only assuming that the concrete is not effective in tension (for use at the strength limit
state).
36
Table 14 Section 2 Short Term Composite (n) Section Properties
Table 15 Section 2 Long Term Composite (3n) Section Properties
37
Table 16 Section 2 Steel Section and Longitudinal Reinforcement Section Properties
Furthermore, the steel section plus longitudinal reinforcement section moduli are computed as
follows,
STOP OF STEEL = 25,261 / 20.34 = 1,242 in.3
SBOT OF STEEL = 25,261 / 24.04 = 1,051 in.3
SREIN.= 25,261 / 27.21 = 928 in.3
8.1.2.4 Plastic Moment: Section 2
Similar to the calculation of the plastic moment for Section 1, Table D6.1-2 is used to determine
the plastic moment (Mp) for the negative bending section as demonstrated below. The concrete
slab is assumed to crack and is neglected in the computation of Mp. The plastic force acting in
each element of the girder is first computed.
Pc = Fycbctc = (50)(16)(1.25) = 1,000 kips
Pw = FywDtw = (50)(42)(0.50) = 1,050 kips
Pt = Fytbttt = (50)(14)(1.125) = 788 kips
Prb = FyrbArb = (60)(2.77) = 166 kips
Prt = FyrtArt = (60)(5.55) = 333 kips
The plastic forces in each element are used to determine the general location of the plastic
neutral axis as follows:
CASE I
Pc + Pw Pt + Prb + Prt
38
1,000 + 1,050 788 + 166 + 333
2,050 1,287 Therefore, the plastic neutral axis is in the web.
The location of plastic neutral axis ( y ) is determined by the following equation:
D P -P -P -P
y= c t rt rb 1
2 Pw
42 1000 788 333 166

y 1 15.26in.
2 1050
The plastic moment (Mp) is then computed as follows:
Mp
2D

y D y 2 Prt d rt Prb d rb Pt d t Pc d c
Pw 2
where,
drt = 15.26 + 2 + 8.0 2.25 = 23.01 in.
drb = 15.26 + 2 + 1.25 = 18.51 in.
dt = 15.26 + 1.125/2 = 15.82 in.
dc = 42.0 15.26 + 1.25/2 = 27.37 in.
1,050
Mp

2 2

15.26 42.0 15.26 30523.01 15218.51 78815.82 100027.37
2 42.0
Mp = 61,515 k-in. = 5,126 k-ft.
8.1.2.5 Yield Moment: Section 2
The process for determining the yield moment of the negative bending section is similar to the
process for the positive bending section. The one difference, though, is that since the composite
short-term and the composite long-term bending sections are both composed of the steel section
and the reinforcing steel only at the strength limit state, the section modulus is the same for both
the short-term and long-term composite sections.
The yield moment is the lesser of the moment which causes first yielding of the section, either
yielding in the bottom flange or yielding in the tension flange or steel reinforcing. Because, for
the negative bending region it is not clear which yield moment value will control, the moments
causing first yield in both compression and tension are computed.
The moment causing yielding in compression flange is first computed based on Equation D6.2.2-
1.
39
M D1 M D 2 M AD
Fyf Eq. (D6.2.2-1)
S NC S LT S ST
1.251,33412 1.2526512 1.50217 12 M AD

50 1.0 1
951.3 1,051 1,057
MAD = 22,562 k-in. = 1,880 k-ft
Myc = (1.25)(1,334) + (1.25)(265) + (1.50)(217) + 1,880 = 4,204 k-ft
The specifications indicate that for regions in negative flexure, Myt is to be taken with respect to
either the tension flange or the longitudinal steel reinforcement, whichever yields first.
Therefore, compute Myt for both and use the smaller value.
The moment which causes yielding in the tension flange is computed as follows:
1.251,33412 1.2526512 1.50217 12 M AD

50 1.0
825.6 1252 1242
MAD = 24,417 k-in. = 2,010 k-ft
Myt = (1.25)(1,334) + (1.25)(265) + (1.50)(217) + 2,010 = 4,334 k-ft
The moment which causes yielding in the longitudinal steel reinforcement is computed as
follows. It is necessary to recognize that there is no noncomposite moment acting on the
longitudinal steel reinforcement, and that Fy should be taken as 60 ksi.
M D1 M D 2 M AD
Fyf Eq. (D6.2.2-1)
S NC S LT S ST
Fyf = Fy = 60 ksi MD1 = 0 k-ft
1.2526512 1.50217 12 M AD
60 1.00
928 928
MAD = 47,799 k-in. = 3,983 k-ft
Myt = (1.25)(265) + (1.50)(217) + 3,983 = 4,638 k-ft
Therefore, the top flange yields before the longitudinal reinforcement, and Myt = 4,334 k-ft.
For the whole section, the compression flange governs, thus My = Myc = 4,204 k-ft.
8.2 Exterior Girder Check: Section 2
This design example illustrates the use of the optional moment redistribution procedures given in
Appendix B6, where moment is redistributed from the negative bending region to the positive
40
bending region; therefore the negative bending region will be checked first in order to determine
the amount of moment that must be redistributed to the positive bending region.
8.2.1 Strength Limit State (Article 6.10.6)
8.2.1.1 Flexure (Appendix A6)
For sections in negative flexure, the flexural capacity of the member can be determined for
general steel I-girders using Article 6.10.8, which limits the maximum capacity to the yield
moment of the section. Alternatively, Appendix A6 permits girder capacities up to Mp and may
be used for girders: having a yield strength less than or equal to 70 ksi, with a compact or non-
compact web (which is defined by Eq. A6.1-1), and satisfying Eq. A6.1-2 (given below). The
applicability of Appendix A6 for this design example is evaluated below.
The first requirement that the nominal yield strength must be less than 70 ksi is easily evaluated.
Fyf = 50 ksi 70 ksi (satisfied)
The web slenderness requirement is evaluated using Eq. A6.1-1.
2 Dc E
5.7 Eq. (A6.1-1)
tW FYC
As computed above the elastic neutral axis is located 24.04 inches from the bottom of the
composite negative bending section. Subtracting the bottom flange thickness gives the web depth
in compression in the elastic range (Dc) as computed below.
Dc = 24.04 1.25 = 22.79 in.
Substituting the applicable values into Eq. A6.1-1 shows that the equation is satisfied.
222.79 29,000
5.7
0.5 50
91.16 < 137.27 (satisfied)
Equation A6.1-2 prevents the use of extremely mono-symmetric girders, which analytical studies
indicate have significantly reduced torsional rigidity.
I yc
0.3 Eq. (A6.1-2)
I yt
(1/12)(1.25)(16)3
1.7 0.3 (satisfied)
(1/12)(1.125)(14)3
Thus, Appendix A6 is applicable.
41
The strength requirements specified by Appendix A6 are given in Section A6.1.1. Since the
compression flange is discretely braced at Section 2, the flexural capacity of the compression
flange must exceed the maximum negative moment plus one-third of the lateral bending stress
due to the factored Strength I loading multiplied by the section modulus for the compression
flange, see Eq. A6.1.1-1.
1
Mu fl S xc f M nc Eq. (A6.1.1-1)
3
However, because the lateral bending forces are zero at the Strength I limit state for the straight
girders considered in this example, the left side of the equation reduces to only the maximum
moment. The tension flange at Section 2 is continuously braced by the concrete deck at the
strength limit state, and must therefore satisfy the following, see Eq. A6.1.4-1.
Mu f RptMyt Eq. (A6.1.4-1)
Use of Appendix A6 begins with the computation of the web plastification factors, as detailed in
Article A6.2 and calculated below. If the section has a web which satisfies the compact web
slenderness limit of Eq. A6.2.1-1, the section can reach Mp provided the flange slenderness and
unbraced length requirements are satisfied.
2 Dcp
PW ( DCP ) , Eq. (A6.2.1-1)
tW
E
Fyc D cp
where: pw(Dcp ) Eq. (A6.2.1-2)
2 rw D
Mp c
0.54 0.09
RhMy

The web depth in compression at Mp is computed by subtracting the previously determined

distance between the top of the web and the plastic neutral axis from the total web depth.
Dcp = 42.0 15.26 = 26.74 in.
The hybrid factor, Rh, is determined from Article 6.10.1.10.1, and is 1.0 for this example since
the design has a homogeneous material configuration. Therefore, pw is computed as follows.
E
rw 5.7 137.27
Fyc
42
29000
50 26.74
pw( D ) 137.27 161.1
22.79
2

cp
61515
0.54 0.09
1.0420412
pw(Dcp) = 74.5 < 161.1 (satisfied)
The web slenderness classification is then determined as follows.
2Dcp 226.74
107.0 pw( Dc ) 74.5 (not compact)
tw 0.5
As shown, the section does not qualify as compact. However, it was previously demonstrated
when evaluating the Appendix A6 applicability that the web does qualify as non-compact.
Therefore, the applicable web plastification factors for non-compact web sections are used and
are determined as specified by Eqs. A6.2.2-4 and A6.2.2-5:.
Rh M yc w pw( DC ) M p M p
Rpc 1 1 Eq. (A6.2.2-4)
Mp
rw pw( DC ) M yc M yc
where: pw( Dc ) = limiting slenderness ratio for a compact web corresponding to 2Dc/tw
D 22.79
pw(D c ) pw(D cp ) c 74.51 63.5 rw 137.27 Eq. (A6.2.2-6)
Dcp 26.74

1.0420412 91.16 47.82 61,515 61515

R pc 1 1
61515 137.27 47.82 420412 420412
Rpc = 1.113 1.219 = 1.113
Rh M yt w pwDc M p Mp
R pt 1 1 Eq. (A6.2.2-5)
M p rw pwDc M yt M yt

1.0433412 91.16 47.82 61,515 61515

R pt 1 1
61515 137.27 47.82 433412 433412
Rpt = 1.094 1.183 = 1.094
The flexural resistance based on the compression flange is determined from Article A6.3 and is
taken as the minimum of the local buckling resistance from Article A6.3.2 and the lateral
torsional buckling resistance from Article A6.3.3.
43
To evaluate the local buckling resistance, the flange slenderness classification is first determined,
where the flange is considered compact if the following equation is satisfied:
f pf
b fc
where: f Eq. (A6.3.2-3)
2t fc
E
pf 0.38 Eq. (A6.3.2-4)
f yc
b fc E
f pf 0.38
2t fc Fyc
16.0 29,000
f pf 0.38
2(1.25) 50
f =6.40 pf 9.15 (satisfied)
Therefore, the compression flange is considered compact, and the flexural capacity based on
local buckling of the compression flange is governed by Eq. A6.3.2-1.
Mnc = Rpc Myc = (1.113)(4,204) = 4,679 k-ft Eq. (A6.3.2-1)
Similarly, to evaluate the compressive flexural resistance based on lateral-torsional buckling, the
unbraced length must be first classified. Unbraced lengths satisfying the following equation are
classified as compact.
Lb Lp
where: Lb= (10.0)(12) = 120 in.
E
120 in. L p rt Eq. (A6.3.3-4)
Fyc
where: rt = effective radius of gyration for lateral torsional buckling (in.)
b fc 16.0
rt = Eq. (A6.3.3-10)
1 Dc tw 1 (22.79)(0.5)
12 1 12 1
3b t 3 (16.0)(1.25)
fc fc
rt = 4.234 in.
44
29,000
Lb Lp 4.234 102.0 (not compact)
50
Because the lateral bracing distance does not satisfy the compact limit, the non-compact limit is
next evaluated.
Lp < Lb Lr
where: Lr = limiting unbraced length to achieve the nominal onset of yielding in either
flange under uniform bending with consideration of compression flange
residual stress effects (in.)
2
E J Fyr S xc h
Lr = 1.95rt 1 1 6.76 Eq. (A6.3.3-5)
Fyr S xc h EJ
Fyr = smaller of the compression flange stress at the nominal onset of yielding of
either flange, with consideration of compression-flange residual stress effects
but without consideration of flange lateral bending, or the specified minimum
yield strength of the web (ksi)
S
Fyr = min 0.7Fyc ,R h Fyt xt ,Fyw Article A6.3.3
Sxc
Sxt = (4334) (12) / 50 = 1040.1 in.3
Sxc = (4204) (12) / 50 = 1009.0 in.3

min 0.750, 1.050
1040.1
Fyr = ,50
1009.0
Fyr = min(35,51.5, 50)
Fyr = 35.0 ksi > 0.5 Fyc = 25ksi (satisfied)
J = St. Venant torsional constant
1 t fc t

Dt w b fc t fc 1 0.63 b ft t ft 3 1 0.63 ft
3 3
J = Eq. (A6.3.3-9)
3 b fc b ft

J =
1
3
(42)(0.5)3 +(16)(1.25)3 .95 +(14)(1.125)3 .95
J = 17.96 in.3
h = depth between the centerline of the flanges
45
h = 1.125/2 + 42 + 1.25/2 = 43.19 in.
35100943.19
2
Lr = 1.954.234
29000 17.96
1 1 6.76
35 100943.19 2900018.81
Lr = 401.0 in.
LB = 120 Lr = 401.0 (satisfied)
Therefore, the unbraced length is classified as non-compact and the lateral torsional buckling
resistance is controlled by Eq. A6.3.3-2 of the Specifications.
Fyr S xc Lb - Lp
M nc Cb 1- 1- Rpc M yc R pc M yc Eq. (A6.3.3-2)
Lr - Lp
Rpc M yc
where: Cb = moment gradient modifier
The moment gradient modifier is discussed in Article A6.3.3 and is calculated in the following
manner.
2
M M
Cb =1.75-1.05 1 +0.3 1 2.3 Eq. (A6.3.3-7)
M2 M2
where: M1 = Mo when the variation in moment between brace points is concave
Otherwise:
M1 = 2Mmid M2 M0
Mmid = major-axis bending moment at the middle of the unbraced length
M0 = moment at the brace point opposite to the one corresponding to M2
M2 = largest major-axis bending moment at either end of the unbraced length

causing compression in the flange under consideration
For the critical moment location at the interior pier, the variation in moment is concave
throughout the unbraced length and the applicable moment values are as follows:
M2 = 5,365 k-ft.
M0 = 2,999 k-ft.
M1 = M0 = 2,999 k-ft Eq. (A6.3.3-11)
46
2
2,999 2,999
Cb =1.75-1.05 +0.3 1.26 2.3
5,365 5,365
Cb = 1.26
Therefore, Mnc is equal to the following.

M nc 1.261 1
35.01009 120 102 1.113(4204) 1.113(4204)

1.113(4204)12 401.0 120
Mnc = 5,775 4,679
Mnc = 4,679 k-ft
If the computed Mnc had been less than RpcMyc in this case, then the equations of Article D6.4.2
could have alternatively been used to potentially obtain a larger resistance. As previously stated,
the flexural capacity based on the compression flange is the minimum of the local buckling
resistance and the lateral torsional buckling resistance, which in this design example are equal.
Mnc = 4,679 k-ft
Multiplying the nominal moment capacity by the applicable resistance factor gives the following.
fMnc = (1.0)(4,679)
fMnc = 4,679 k-ft
The moment capacity is also evaluated in terms of the tensile moment capacity. For a
continuously braced tension flange at the strength limit state, the section must satisfy the
requirements of Article A6.1.4.
Mu fRptMyt Eq. (A6.1.4-1)
f Mnt = fRptMyt
f Mnt = (1.0)(1.094)(4,334)
f Mnt =4,741 k-ft
This moment capacity is less than the applied Strength I factored moment of 5,365 k-ft, but is not
less than the moment capacity determined based on the resistance of the section in compression.
Thus, the compression moment capacity will govern the moment resistance for the negative
bending region of the girder.
fMnt = 4,741 k-ft < Mu = 5,365 k-ft
fMnt = 4,741 k-ft > f Mnc = 4,679 k-ft
47
fMn = 4,679 k-ft
Comparing this moment resistance to the Strength I factored moment at the pier shows that the
factored moment is greater than the moment resistance. Thus, moment redistribution may be
considered.
Mu = 5,365 > fMnc = 4,679 k-ft
8.2.1.2 Moment Redistribution (Appendix B6, Articles B6.1 B6.5)
Article B6.2 defines the applicability of the optional Appendix B6 provisions. Specifically, the
provisions may only be applied to straight continuous span I-section members whose bearing
lines are not skewed more than 10 degrees from normal and along which there are no staggered
(or discontinuous) cross-frames. The specified minimum yield strength of the section must not
exceed 70 ksi. In addition, the section must satisfy the web proportion (Article B6.2.1),
compression flange proportion (Article B6.2.2), section transition (Article B6.2.3), compression
flange bracing (Article B6.2.4), and shear (Article B6.2.5) requirements discussed below.
8.2.1.2.1 Web Proportions
Equations B6.2.1-1, B6.2.1-2, and B6.2.1-3 specify the web proportion limits that must be
satisfied.
D
150 Eq. (B6.2.1-1)
tw
D 42.0
84.0 150 (satisfied)
tw 0.5
2D c E
6.8 Eq. (B6.2.1-2)
tw Fyc
222.79 29,000
91.16 6.8 163.8 (satisfied)
0.50 50
Dcp 0.75D Eq. (B6.2.1-3)
Dcp = 26.74 0.75(42.0) = 31.50 (satisfied)
8.2.1.2.2 Compression Flange Proportions
Section B6.2.2 requires that the following two compression flange proportion limits be satisfied.
b fc E
0.38 Eq. (B6.2.2-1)
2t fc Fyc
48
16 29,000
6.40 0.38 9.15 (satisfied)
2(1.25) 50
D
b fc Eq. (B6.2.2-2)
4.25
42
bfc =16.0 =9.88 (satisfied)
4.25
8.2.1.2.3 Compression Flange Bracing Distance
The compression flange bracing distance must satisfy the following:
M r E
Lb 0.1- 0.06 1 t Eq. (B6.2.4-1)
M 2 Fyc
2,999 (4.234)(29,000)
Lb =120.0 0.1-0.06 =163.2 (satisfied)
5,365 50
8.2.1.2.4 Shear
Additionally, the applied shear under the Strength I loading must be less than or equal to the
shear buckling resistance of the girder as specified by the following:
V vVcr Eq. (B6.2.5-1)
where: Vcr = shear buckling resistance (kip)
Vcr = CVp (for unstiffened webs) Eq.(6.10.9.2-1)
Vp = plastic shear force (kip)
Vp = 0.58 FywDtw Eq. (6.10.9.2-2)
C = ratio of the shear buckling resistance to the shear yield strength

determined as specified in Article 6.10.9.3.2, with the shear buckling
coefficient, k, taken equal to 5.0
Equations are provided for computing the value of C based on the web slenderness of the girder.
First the web slenderness is evaluated using the following equation.
D Ek
1.12
tw Fyw
42.0 (29,000)(5)
=84.0>1.12 =60.31 (not satisfied)
0.50 50
49
The web slenderness is next evaluated using the following equation.
Ek D Ek
1.12 1.40
Fyw t w Fyw
Ek D Ek
1.12 60.31 84.0 1.40 75.4 (not satisfied)
Fyw tw Fyw
Thus, the governing equation for computing the ratio C is given by Eq. 6.10.9.3.2-6, which is
applicable when:
D Ek
84.0 1.40 75.4 (satisfied)
tw Fyw
1.57 Ek
C 2 Eq. (6.10.9.3.2-6)
D Fyc

tw
1.57
C= 2,900 0.645
84.0
2
The shear buckling resistance is then computed as follows.
Vcr =CVp =(0.645)(0.58)(50)(42)(0.5)=392.8 kips
The shear requirement for Appendix B6 can then be evaluated.
V=337 kips Vcr =(1.0)(392.8)=392.8 kips (satisfied)
The provisions of Article B6.2.1 through B6.2.6 are satisfied for this section. Therefore,
moments may be redistributed in accordance with Appendix B6.
The effective plastic moment, determined from Article B6.5, is a function of the geometry and
material properties of the section. Furthermore, alternative equations are provided for girders that
satisfy the requirements for enhanced moment rotation characteristics, i.e., classification as
ultracompact sections. To be classified as ultracompact, the girder must either: (1) contain
transverse stiffeners at a location less than or equal to one-half the web depth from the pier, or
(2) satisfy the web compactness limit given by Eq. B6.5.1-1.
2 Dcp E
2.3 Eq. (B6.5.1-1)
tw Fyc
50
226.74 29,000
107.0 2.3 55.4 (not satisfied)
0.50 50
Therefore, the section does not satisfy the web compactness limit and because the section uses an
unstiffened web, the girder does not satisfy the transverse stiffener requirement. Thus, the girder
is not considered to be ultracompact and the applicable Mpe equation at the strength limit state is
thus Eq. B6.5.2-2.
b fc Fyc D b fc Fyc D
M pe = 2.63 - 2.3 - 0.35 0.39 Mn Mn Eq. (B6.5.2-2)
t fc E b fc t fc E b fc
16 50 42 16 50 42
M pe 2.63 2.3 0.35 0.39 4679 4679
1.25 29000 16 1.25 29000 16
Mpe = 4,832 4,679 = 4,679 k-ft
The redistribution moment, Mrd, for the strength limit state is taken as the larger of the values
calculated from Eqs. B6.4.2.1-1 and B6.4.2.1-2.
1
M rd M e fl S xc - f M pe Eq. (B6.4.2.1-1)
3
1
M rd M e fl S xt - f M pe Eq. (B6.4.2.1-2)
3
where: Me = critical elastic moment envelope value at the interior-pier section due to the
factored loads
Since the lateral bending stresses are negligible for this example, the previous equations reduce
to the following equation.
M rd M e - f M pe
In addition, the redistribution moment is limited to 20 percent of the elastic moment by Eq.
B6.4.2.1-3.
0 Mrd 0.2 M e Eq. (B6.4.2.1-3)
Therefore, the redistribution moment is computed as follows, which is shown to satisfy the 20%
limit.
Mrd = |Me| - fMpe = 5,365 - (1.0)(4,679)
Mrd = 686 k-ft = 12.8% Me 20% Me
51
Therefore, the negative bending region of the girder satisfies the strength limit state requirements
when the effective plastic moment equations given in Appendix B6 are used to evaluate the
girder capacity.
8.2.1.3 Moment Redistribution - Refined Method (Appendix B6, Article B6.6)
Article B6.6 of Appendix B6 contains specifications for computing redistribution moments using
a direct method of analysis. Using this analysis procedure, the effective plastic moments are
computed based on the rotation at which the continuity curve intersects the moment-rotation
curve, as opposed to assuming that this intersection occurs at a plastic rotation of 30 mrads, as
assumed in the effective plastic moment equations utilized above.
In cases such as this example, where the effective plastic moment is equal to the nominal
moment capacity of the negative bending section, there is no advantage to be gained by using the
refined method. This is because the peak value of the moment-rotation curve is equal to Mn , the
maximum value of Mpe possible, irrespective of using the effective plastic moment equations
from Article B6.5 or the refined method of Article B6.6. However, in other cases the use of the
refined method may lead to higher values of Mpe, further increasing the economic benefits of
using the moment redistribution procedures. For this reason, the use of the refined method for the
present design is demonstrated below.
The first step in using the refined method for moment redistribution is to determine the moment-
rotation curve for the negative bending section. This is done using Figure B6.6.2-1 from the
AASHTO LRFD (7th Edition, 2014) Specifications, which is reproduced in Figure 12. From
Figure 12 it is observed that the moment-rotation relationship is a function of the single
parameter, RL, which is the rotation at which the moment begins to decrease below the nominal
moment capacity. Similar to the equations for Mpe given for the simplified method introduced
above, alternative equations for RL are given based on whether the negative bending section
satisfies the criteria for enhanced moment rotation characteristics given by Section B6.5. It has
been shown above that the negative bending section does not satisfy either of the requirements
for sections with enhanced moment-rotation performance. Thus, RL is given in radians by Eq.
B6.6.2-2.
Figure 12 AASHTO LRFD Moment-Rotation Model
52
bfc Fyc D b D Fyc
RL 0.128 0.143 0.0216 0.0241 fc Eq. (B6.6.2-2)
t fc E bfc t fc bfc E
Substituting the applicable values into Eq. B6.6.2-2 gives the following.
16 50 42 16(42) 50
RL 0.128 0.143 0.0216 0.0241 0.079
1.25 29000 16 0.5(16) 29000
Thus, RL is equal to 0.079 radians or 79 mrads. Recalling that the nominal moment capacity of
the negative moment section of this girder is 4679 ft-kips, the predicted moment-rotation
relationship of the example girder is as illustrated in Figure 13.
Figure 13 Determination of Mpe Using Refined Method
In addition to the moment-rotation relationship, the continuity relationship must also be

determined. The continuity relationship is a linear relationship between the elastic moment at the
pier (where no plastic rotation occurs) and the rotation assuming no continuity at the pier. The
elastic moment at the pier has previously been determined to equal 5365 ft-kips, which is the y-
intercept for the continuity relationship. To determine the x-intercept of the continuity
relationship, the beam is analyzed assuming that a hinge exists at each pier, and rotations due to
applied moments equal to the elastic moment are computed as shown in Figure 14. In this
analysis, the AASHTO LRFD (7th Edition, 2014) Specifications stipulate that the section
properties of the short-term composite section are to be used. Thus, the applicable moment of
inertia of the positive bending section is 48,806 in4 and the moment of inertia value used for the
negative bending section is 50,027 in4. From basic structural analysis, or the use of structural
analysis software, the rotation at the pier for the situation depicted in Figure 14 is computed to be
32.88 mrads, which is the x-intercept for the continuity relationship. Based on the x- and y-
intercepts of the continuity relationship, the continuity equation is thus expressed as
53
M = 5365 ft-kips 163.17 ft-kips * p
Figure 14 Determination of Rotation at Pier Assuming No Continuity
The moment at the intersection of the continuity relationship and the moment-rotation
relationship is the effective plastic moment. From Figure 13 it is illustrated that this moment is
equal to the nominal moment capacity of 4679 ft-kips. The effective plastic moment can also be
determined mathematically by iteratively selecting p values to be substituted into both the
moment-rotation and continuity curves until the moment converges. Alternatively, for the
present girder it is known that the moment is equal to Mn for p values between 5 and 79 mrads.
Solving the continuity equation for the value of p at Mn gives a rotation of:
p = (5365 4679) / 163.17 = 5.8 mrads.
Since this value is between 5 and 79 mrads, it is mathematically determined that the effective
plastic moment is equal to Mn. Once Mpe is determined, the moment redistribution analysis
proceeds in the same manner used in the simplified method outlined above, where the
redistribution moments are computed as the difference between the elastic and the effective
plastic moments as specified in Articles B6.3 and B6.4 and the girder is determined to satisfy the
strength limit state requirements if the redistribution moment is less than 20% of the elastic
moment.
8.2.1.4 Shear (6.10.6.3)
As computed above the shear resistance of the negative bending region is governed by Article
6.10.9.2 because the girder is comprised of an unstiffened web, i.e., no transverse stiffeners are
provided. The shear resistance of the section was previously calculated to be:
Vn = V =CVp =392.8kips Eq. (6.10.9.2-1)
The applied shear at the pier at the strength limit state is 337 kips. Thus, the shear requirements
are satisfied.
V=337kips V Vcr =(1.0)(392.8)=392.8kips (satisfied)
8.2.2 Constructibility (Article 6.10.3)
Article 2.5.3 requires the engineer to design bridge systems such that the construction is not
difficult and does not result in unacceptable locked-in forces. In addition, Article 6.10.3 states
the main load-carrying members are not permitted to experience nominal yielding, or reliance on
54
post-buckling resistance during the construction phases. The sections must satisfy the
requirements of Article 6.10.3 at each construction stage. The applied loads to be considered are
specified in Table 3.4.1-1 and the applicable load factors are provided in Article 3.4.2.
The girders are considered to be non-composite during the initial construction phase. The
influence of various segments of the girder becoming composite at various stages of the deck
casting sequence is then considered. The effects of forces from deck overhang brackets acting on
the fascia girders are to be included in the constructibility checks.
8.2.2.1 Flexure (Article 6.10.3.2)
In regions of negative flexure, Eqs. 6.10.3.2.1-1, 6.10.3.2.1-2 and 6.10.3.2.2-1 specified in

Article 6.10.3.2, which are to be checked for critical stages of construction, generally do not
control because the sizes of the flanges in these regions are normally governed by the design
checks at the strength limit state. Also, the maximum accumulated negative moments from the
deck-placement analysis in these regions, plus the negative moments due to the steel weight,
typically do not differ significantly from (or may be smaller than) the calculated DC1 negative
moments ignoring the effects of the sequential deck placement. The deck-overhang loads do
introduce lateral bending stresses into the flanges in these regions, which can be calculated and
used to check the above equations in a manner similar to that illustrated later on in this example
for Section 1. Wind load, when considered for the construction case, also introduces lateral
bending into the flanges.
When applying Eqs. 6.10.3.2.1-1, 6.10.3.2.1-2 and 6.10.3.2.2-1 in these regions, the bottom
flange would be considered to be a discretely braced compression flange and the top flange
would be considered to be a discretely braced tension flange for all constructibility checks to be
made before the concrete deck has hardened or is made composite. The nominal flexural
resistance of the bottom flange, Fnc, for checking Eq. 6.10.3.2.1-2 would be calculated in a
manner similar to that demonstrated below for Section 1. For the sake of brevity, the application
of Eqs. 6.10.3.2.1-1, 6.10.3.2.1-2 and 6.10.3.2.2-1 to the construction case for the unbraced
lengths adjacent to Section 2 will not be shown in this example.
Note that for sections with slender webs, web bend-buckling should always be checked in
regions of negative flexure according to Eq. 6.10.3.2.1-3 for critical stages of construction. In
this example, however, Section 2 is not a slender-web section.
8.2.2.2 Shear (Article 6.10.3.3)
The required shear capacity during construction is specified by Eq. 6.10.3.3-1. Later in this
design example, the unstiffened shear capacity of the girder is demonstrated to be sufficient to
resist the applied shear at the strength limit state. Therefore, the section will have sufficient shear
capacity for the constructibility check.
Vu vVcr Eq. (6.10.3.3-1)
55
8.2.3 Service Limit State (Article 6.10.4)
Permanent deformations are controlled under the service limit state. Service limit state design
checks for steel I-girder bridges are specified in Article 6.10.4.
8.2.3.1 Permanent Deformations (Article 6.10.4.2)
Permanent deformations that may negatively impact the rideability of the structure are controlled
by limiting the stresses in the section under expected severe traffic loadings. Specifically, under
the Service II load combination, the top flange of composite sections must satisfy:
ff 0.95RhFyf Eq. (6.10.4.2.2-1)
Because the bottom flange is discretely braced (as opposed to the top flange), Eq. 6.10.4.2.2-2
must be satisfied for the bottom flange of composite sections as follows:
fl
ff 0.95Rh Fyf Eq. (6.10.4.2.2-2)
2
At the service limit state, the lateral force effects due to wind loads and deck overhang loads are
not considered. Therefore, for bridges with straight, non-skewed girders such as the case in the
present design example, the lateral bending stresses are taken equal to zero and Eq. 6.10.4.2.2-2
reduces to Eq. 6.10.4.2.2-1.
For sections satisfying the requirements of Article B6.2, Appendix B6 permits the redistribution
of moment at the service limit state before evaluating the above equations. As demonstrated
previously, Section 2 satisfies the requirements of Article B6.2. Article B6.5.2 specifies the
effective plastic moment to be used at the service limit state as follows:
b fc Fyc D b fc Fyc D
M pe 2.90 2.3 0.35 0.39 Mn Mn Eq. (B6.5.2-1)
t fc E b fc t fc E b fc
16 50 42 16 50 42
M pe 2.90 2.3 0.35 0.39 4679 4679
1.25 29000 16 1.25 29000 16
Mpe = 6,079 k-ft 4,679 k-ft
Mpe = 4,679 k-ft > Mu = 4,075 k-ft
Because the effective plastic moment is greater than the maximum factored moment for the
Service II load combination, it is assumed that there is no moment redistribution at this limit
state. The elastic stresses under the Service II load combination are therefore computed using the
following equation assuming no moment redistribution:
M DC1 M DC 2 M DW 1.3M LL IM
ff
Snc Slt Sst
56
For members with shear connectors provided throughout their entire length that also satisfy the
provisions of Article 6.10.1.7, and where the maximum longitudinal tensile stresses in the
concrete deck at the section under consideration caused by the Service II loads are smaller than
2fr, Article 6.10.4.2.1 permits the concrete deck to also be considered effective for negative
flexure when computing flexural stresses acting on the composite section at the service limit
state. fr is the modulus of rupture of the concrete specified in Article 6.10.1.7.
Separate calculations (not shown) were made to ensure that the minimum longitudinal
reinforcement (determined previously) satisfied the provisions of Article 6.10.1.7 for both the
factored construction loads and the Service II loads. Check the maximum longitudinal tensile
stresses in the concrete deck under the Service II loads at Section 2. The longitudinal concrete
deck stress is to be determined as specified in Article 6.10.1.1.1d; that is, using the short-term
modular ratio n = 8. Note that only DC2, DW and LL+IM are assumed to cause stress in the
concrete deck.
f r 0.24 fc' 0.24 4.0 0.48 ksi
1.01.0- 265 1.0 217 1.3 1,73714.23512

fdeck 1.17 ksi 2fr 2(0.48) 0.96 ksi
50,027(8)
Therefore, since the concrete deck may not be considered effective in tension at Section 2, the
Service II flexural stresses will be computed using the section consisting of the steel girder plus
the longitudinal reinforcement only for loads applied to the composite section.
The stress in the compression flange is thus computed as follows.
ff
- 133412 - 265- 21712 1.3- 173712 48.11 ksi
951.3 1051 1051
Comparing this stress to the allowable stress shows that Eq. 6.10.4.2.2-1 is satisfied within an
acceptable tolerance; the applied stress and the stress limit differ by approximately one percent.
ff - 48.11ksi 0.95R h Fyf 0.951.050 47.50ksi (1% overstress say satisfied)
Similarly, the computation of the stress in the tension flange is computed as follows.
ff
- 133412 - 265- 21712 1.3- 173712 45.86 ksi
825.6 1242 1242
Thus, it is also demonstrated that Eq. 6.10.4.2.2-2 is satisfied for the tension flange.
ff 45.86 ksi 0.95R h Fyf 0.951.050 47.50ksi (satisfied)
The compression flange stress at service loads is also limited to the elastic bend-buckling
resistance of the web by Eq. 6.10.4.2.2-4.
57
fc Fcrw Eq. (6.10.4.2.2-4)
where: fc = compression flange stress at the section under consideration due to the
Service II loads calculated without consideration of flange lateral
bending
Fcrw = nominal elastic bend buckling resistance for webs with or without
longitudinal stiffeners, as applicable, determined as specified in Article
6.10.1.9
From Article 6.10.1.9, the bend-buckling resistance for the web is determined using the
following equation.
0.9Ek Fyw
Fcrw min R h Fyc, Eq. (6.10.1.9.1-1)
D
2
0.7

tw
9
where: k = bend-buckling coefficient Eq. (6.10.1.9.1-2)
Dc / D
2
As specified in Article D6.3.1, the depth of web in compression for composite sections in
negative flexure where the concrete deck is not considered to be effective in tension at the
service limit state is to be calculated for the section consisting of the steel girder plus the
longitudinal reinforcement.
Dc = 24.04 1.25 = 22.79 in.
Therefore, k and Fcrw are computed as follows.
9
k 30.57
2
22.79

42.0
0.9(29,000)(30.57)
Fcrw 113.08 ksi R h Fyc 50 ksi
2
42

0.50
Fcrw = 50 ksi
It can then be demonstrated that Eq. 6.10.4.2.2-4 is satisfied as shown below.
fc - 48.11ksi Fcrw 50 ksi (satisfied)
58
8.2.4 Fatigue and Fracture Limit State (Article 6.10.5)
The fatigue and fracture limit state incorporates three distinctive checks: fatigue resistance of
details (Article 6.10.5.1), fracture toughness (Article 6.10.5.2), and a special fatigue requirement
for webs (Article 6.10.5.3). The first requirement involves the assessment of the fatigue
resistance of details as specified in Article 6.6.1 using the appropriate Fatigue load combination
specified in Table 3.4.1-1 and the fatigue live load specified in Article 3.6.1.4. The fracture
toughness requirements in Article 6.10.5.2 specify that the fracture toughness must satisfy the
requirements of Article 6.6.2. The special fatigue requirement for the web controls the elastic
flexing of the web to prevent fatigue cracking. The factored fatigue load for this check is to be
taken as the Fatigue I load combination specified in Table 3.4.1-1.
8.2.4.1 Load Induced Fatigue (Article 6.6.1.2)
Article 6.10.5.1 requires that fatigue be investigated in accordance with Article 6.6.1. Article
6.6.1 requires that the live load stress range be less than the nominal fatigue resistance. The
nominal fatigue resistance, (F)n, varies based on the fatigue detail category and is computed
using Eq. 6.6.1.2.5-1 for the Fatigue I load combination and infinite fatigue life; or Eq. 6.6.1.2.5-
2 for Fatigue II load combination and finite fatigue life.
Fn FTH Eq. (6.6.1.2.5-1)
1
A 3
Fn Eq. (6.6.1.2.5-2)
N
where: N = (365)(75)n(ADTT)SL Eq. (6.6.1.2.5-3)
A = constant from Table 6.6.1.2.5-1
n = number of stress range cycles per truck passage taken from Table
6.6.1.2.5-2
(ADTT)SL= single-lane ADTT as specified in Article 3.6.1.4
(F)TH = constant-amplitude fatigue threshold taken from Table 6.6.1.2.5-3
The fatigue resistance of the base metal at the weld joining the cross-frame connection plate
located 10 feet from the pier to the flanges is evaluated below. From Table 6.6.1.2.3-1, it is
determined that this detail is classified as a fatigue Detail Category C'. The constant-amplitude
fatigue threshold, (F)TH, for a Category C' detail is 12.0 ksi (see Table 6.6.1.2.5-3).
For this example, an (ADTT)SL of 800 trucks per day is assumed. Since this (ADTT)SL exceeds
the value of 745 trucks per day specified in Table 6.6.1.2.3-2 for a Category C detail, the
nominal fatigue resistance for this particular detail is to be determined for the Fatigue I load
combination and infinite fatigue life using Eq. 6.6.1.2.5-1. Therefore:
F n F TH 12.00ksi
59
The applied stress range is taken as the result of the fatigue loading with a dynamic load
allowance of 15 percent applied and distributed laterally by the previously calculated distribution
factor for fatigue.
According to Article 6.6.1.2.1, for flexural members with shear connectors provided throughout
their entire length and with concrete deck reinforcement satisfying the provisions of Article
6.10.1.7, flexural stresses and stress ranges applied to the composite section at the fatigue limit
state at all sections in the member may be computed assuming the concrete deck to be effective
for both positive and negative flexure. Shear connectors are assumed provided along the entire
length of the girder in this example. Separate computations (not shown) were made to ensure
that the longitudinal concrete deck reinforcement satisfies the provisions of Article 6.10.1.7.
Therefore, the concrete deck will be assumed effective in computing all dead load and live load
stresses and live load stress ranges applied to the composite section in the subsequent fatigue
calculations.
The provisions of Article 6.6.1.2 apply only to details subject to a net applied tensile stress.
According to Article 6.6.1.2.1, in regions where the unfactored permanent loads produce
compression, fatigue is to be considered only if this compressive stress is less than the maximum
tensile stress resulting from the Fatigue I load combination specified in Table 3.4.1-1. Note that
the live-load stress due to the passage of the fatigue load is considered to be that of the heaviest
truck expected to cross the bridge in 75 years. At this location, the unfactored permanent loads
produce tension at the top of the girder and compression at the bottom of the girder. In this
example, the effect of the future wearing surface is conservatively ignored when determining if a
detail is subject to a net applied tensile stress.
Bottom of Top Flange:
104124.24 285 124.24

f 1.50
50,027 50,027
(f) = 0.59 ksi (F)n = 12.00 ksi (satisfied)
Top of Bottom Flange:
(674)(12)(19.37)
f DC1 7.99 ksi
19,616
(134)(12)(30.10)
f DC2 1.30 ksi
37,222
= -7.99 + -1.30 = -9.29 ksi
1.5(104)(12)(37.77)
f LL IM 1.41 ksi
50,027
60
9.29 ksi 1.41 ksi fatigue does not need to be checked
8.2.4.2 Distortion Induced Fatigue (Article 6.6.1.3)
A positive connection is to be provided for all transverse connection-plate details to both the top
and bottom flanges to prevent distortion induced fatigue.
8.2.4.3 Fracture (Article 6.6.2)
The appropriate Charpy V-notch fracture toughness, found in Table 6.6.2-2, must be specified
for main load-carrying components subjected to tensile stress under the Strength I load
combination.
8.2.4.4 Special Fatigue Requirement for Webs (Article 6.10.5.3)
Article 6.10.5.3 requires that the shear force applied due to the unfactored permanent loads plus
the factored fatigue loading (i.e. the Fatigue I load combination) must be less than the shear-
buckling resistance of interior panels of stiffened webs.
Vu Vcr Eq. (6.10.5.3-1)
However, designs utilizing unstiffened webs at the strength limit state, as is the case here,
automatically satisfy this criterion. Thus, Eq. 6.10.5.3-1 is not explicitly evaluated herein.
8.3 Exterior Girder Check: Section 1
8.3.1 Constructibility (Article 6.10.3)
8.3.1.1 Deck Placement Analysis
In regions of positive flexure, temporary moments that the non-composite girders experience
during the casting of the deck can sometimes be significantly higher than those which may be
calculated based on the final conditions of the system. An analysis of the moments during each
casting sequence must be conducted to determine the maximum moments in the structure acting
on the non-composite girders in those regions. The potential for uplift during the deck casting
should also be investigated.
Figure 15 depicts the casting sequence assumed in this design example. As required in Article
6.10.3.4, the loads are applied to the appropriate composite sections during each casting
sequence. For example, it is assumed during Cast One that all sections of the girder are non-
composite. Similarly, the dead load moments due to the steel components are also based on the
non-composite section properties. However, to determine the distribution of moments due to
Cast Two, the short-term composite section properties are used in the regions of the girders that
were previously cast in Cast One, while the non-composite section properties are used in the
region of the girder where concrete is cast in Cast Two. The moments used in the evaluation of
the constructibility requirements are then taken as the maximum moments that occur on the non-
composite girder during any stage of construction, i.e., the sum of the moments due to the steel
61
dead load and the first casting phase or the sum of the moments due to the steel dead load and
both casting phases. Additionally, while not required, the dead load moment resulting from
applying all dead load at once (i.e. without consideration of the sequential placement) to the non-
composite section (DC1) is also considered.
Figure 15 Deck Placement Sequence
The results of the deck placement analysis are shown in Table 17 where the maximum dead load
moments in the positive bending region acting on the non-composite section is indicated by bold
text. Note that because of the deck-casting sequence chosen for this particular example, the
maximum positive bending moment acting on the non-composite section is not caused by the
sequential deck placement (i.e. Cast One). Therefore, the DC1 moment of 738 kip-ft at Section
1, ignoring the effect of the sequential deck placement, will be used in the subsequent
constructibility design checks.
Table 17 Moments from Deck Placement Analysis (kip-ft)
Article 6.10.1.6 states that when checking the flexural resistance based on lateral torsional
buckling, fbu is to be taken as the largest compressive stress in the flange under consideration,
without consideration of flange lateral bending, throughout the unbraced length. When checking
the flexural resistance based on yielding, flange local buckling or web bend buckling, fbu is to be
taken as the stress at the section under consideration. The maximum factored flexural stresses
due to the deck casting sequence are calculated below.
62
8.3.1.1.1 Strength I
Top Flange
1.0(1.25)(738)(12)
f bu 13.41 ksi
825.6
Bottom Flange
1.0(1.25)(738)(12)
f bu 11.55 ksi
958.6
8.3.1.1.2 Special Load Combination (Article 3.4.2.1)
Top Flange
1.0(1.4)(738)(12)
f bu 15.02 ksi
825.6
Bottom Flange
1.0(1.4)(738)(12)
f bu 12.93 ksi
958.6
8.3.1.2 Deck Overhang Loads
The loads applied to the deck overhang brackets induce torsion on the fascia girders, which
introduces flange lateral bending stresses. This section illustrates the recommended approach to
estimate these lateral bending stresses.
The deck overhang bracket configuration assumed in this example is shown in Figure 16.
Typically the brackets are spaced between 3 and 4 feet, but the assumption is made here that the
loads are uniformly distributed, except for the finishing machine. Half of the overhang weight is
assume to be carried by the exterior girder, and the remaining half is carried by the overhang
brackets.
63
Figure 16 Deck Overhang Bracket Loads
The following calculation determines the weight of the deck overhang acting on the overhang
brackets.
8.5 1 2.0 14 / 2 1.25 14 / 2

P 0.5(150) (3.5) 3.5 208.7 lbs/ft
12 12 2 12 12 12
The following is a list of typical construction loads assumed to act on the system before the
concrete slab gains strength. The magnitudes of load listed are those that are applied to only the
overhang brackets. Note that the finishing machine load shown represents one-half of the
finishing machine truss weight.
Overhang Deck Forms: P = 40 lb/ft
Screed Rail: P = 85 lb/ft
Railing: P = 25 lb/ft
Walkway: P = 125 lb/ft
Finishing Machine: P = 3,000 lb
The lateral force acting on the girder section due to the vertical loading is computed as follows.
F = Ptan
42in.
where: = tan -1 = 45
42in.
64
The equations provided in Article C6.10.3.4 to determine the lateral bending moment can be
employed in the absence of a more refined method. From the article, the following equation
determines the lateral bending moment for a uniformly distributed lateral bracket force:
Fl Lb 2
Ml
12
where: Ml = lateral bending moment in the top flange due to the eccentric loadings
from the form brackets
Fl = statically equivalent uniformly distributed lateral force due to the

factored loads
The equation which estimates the lateral bending moment due to a concentrated lateral force at
the middle of the unbraced length is as follows.
Pl Lb
Ml
8
where: Pl = statically equivalent concentrated force placed at the middle of the

unbraced length
For simplicity, the largest value of fl within the unbraced length is conservatively used in the
design checks, i.e., the maximum value of fl within the unbraced length is the assumed stress
level throughout the unbraced length. The unbraced length for the section under consideration is
20 feet.
Article 6.10.1.6 specifies the process for determining the lateral bending stress. The first-order
lateral bending stress may be used if the following limit is satisfied.
Cb Rb
Lb 1.2 Lp Eq. (6.10.1.6-2)
fbm
Fyc
where: Lp = limiting unbraced length from Article 6.10.8.2.3 of the Specifications
Cb = moment gradient modifier
Rb = web load-shedding factor
Fyc = yield strength of the compression flange
Cb is the moment gradient modifier specified in Article 6.10.8.2.3. Separate calculations show
that fmid/f2 > 1 in the unbraced length under consideration. Therefore, Cb must be taken equal to
1.0.
65
According to Article 6.10.1.10.2, the web load-shedding factor, Rb, is to be taken as 1.0 when
checking constructibility.
Calculate Lp:
Dc = 26.01 0.75 = 25.26 in.
bfc 14
rt 3.48 in.
1 Dc t w 1 25.26(0.4375)
121
121
3 bfc t fc 3 14(0.75)
E 29,000
Lp 1.0rt 1.0(3.48) 83.8 in. Eq. (6.10.8.2.3-4)
Fyc 50
Thus, Eq. 6.10.1.6-2 is evaluated as follows.
(1.0)(1.0)
Lb 240 in. 1.2(83.8) 183.5 in.
15.02 50
Because Eq. 6.10.1.6-2 is not satisfied, Article 6.10.1.6 requires that second-order elastic
compression-flange lateral bending stresses be determined. The second-order compression-
flange lateral bending stresses may be determined by amplifying first-order values (i.e. f1) as
follows:

f f f
0.85
f bu 1 1
Eq. (6.10.1.6-4)
1
Fcr
or: f (AF)f 1 f 1
where AF is the amplification factor and Fcr is the elastic lateral torsional buckling stress for the
flange under consideration specified in Article 6.10.8.2.3 determined as:
Cb R b 2E
Fcr Eq. (6.10.8.2.3-8)
2
Lb

r
t
1.0(1.0)2 (29,000)
Fcr 60.18 ksi
2
20(12)

3.48
Note that the calculated value of Fcr for use in Eq. 6.10.1.6-4 is not limited to RbRhFyc.
66
The amplification factor is then determined as follows:
For Strength I:
0.85
AF 1.09 1.0 ok
13.41
1
60.18

For the Special Load Combination specified in Article 3.4.2.1:
0.85
AF 1.13 1.0 ok
15.02
1

60.18
AF is taken equal to 1.0 for tension flanges.
8.3.1.2.1 Strength I
The lateral bending stresses for the Strength I load combination are computed as follows. As
specified in Article 3.4.2.1, the load factor for construction loads and any associated dynamic
effects is not to be taken less than 1.5 for the Strength I load combination.
Dead loads:
P = [1.25(209) + 1.5(40 + 85 + 25 + 125)] = 673.8 lbs/ft.
F = Fl = P tan = 673.8 tan (45) = 673.8 lbs/ft.
M
F L2b

0.6738202 22.46 kip ft
12 12
M 22.46(12)
Top Flange: f 11.00 ksi
S 0.75(14)2 6
M 22.46(12)
Bottom Flange: f 5.05 ksi
S 1.25(16)2 6
Finishing machine load:
P = [1.5(3,000)] = 4,500 lbs.
F = Pl = P tan = 4,500 tan (45) = 4,500 lbs.
67
PL
M b
4.520 11.25 kip ft
8 8
M 11.25(12)
S 0.75(14)2 6
M 11.25(12)
S 1.25(16)2 6
Total:
Top flange: fl = (11.00 + 5.51)AF = (11.00 + 5.51)(1.09) = 17.99 ksi
Bot. flange: fl = (5.05 + 2.53)AF = (5.05 + 2.53)(1.0) = 7.58 ksi
8.3.1.2.2 Special Load Combination (Article 3.4.2.1)
The computation of the lateral bending stresses for the special load combination specified in
Article 3.4.2.1 is demonstrated below.
Dead loads:
P 1.4209 40 85 25 125 677.6 lbs / ft

F F P tan 677.6 tan 45 677.6 lbs / ft
M
FL2b

0.6776202 22.59 k ft
12 12
M 22.59(12)
S 0.75(14)2 6
M 22.59(12)
S 1.25(16)2 6
Finishing machine load:
P = [1.4(3,000)] = 4,200 lbs.
F = Pl = P tan = 4,200 tan (45) = 4,200 lbs.
PL
M b
4.220 10.50 kip ft
8 8
68
M 10.50(12)
S 0.75(14)2 6
M 10.50(12)
S 1.25(16)2 6
Total:
Top flange: fl = (11.06 + 5.14)(AF) = (11.06 + 5.14)(1.13) = 18.31 ksi
Bot. flange: fl = (5.08 + 2.36)(AF) = (5.08 + 2.36)(1.0) = 7.44 ksi
According to Article 6.10.1.6, the lateral bending stresses (after amplification) must be less than
60 percent of the yield stress of the flange under consideration. It is shown above that the lateral
bending stresses are highest in the top flange under the Special Load Combination, and highest in
the bottom flange under the Strength I load combination. Thus, evaluation of Eq. 6.10.1.6-1 for
the Special Load Combination combination is shown below.
fl 0.6Fy (6.10.1.6-1)
Top flange: fl = 18.31 ksi < 0.6Fyf = 30 ksi (satisfied)
Bot. flange: fl = 7.58 ksi < 0.6Fyf = 30 ksi (satisfied)
During construction, both the compression and tension flanges are discretely braced. Therefore,
Article 6.10.3.2 requires the non-composite section to satisfy Eqs. 6.10.3.2.1-1, 6.10.3.2.1-2, and
6.10.3.2.1-3, which ensure the flange stress is limited to the yield stress, the section has sufficient
strength under the lateral torsional and flange local buckling limit states, and web bend buckling
does not occur during construction, respectively.
First, determine if the non-composite section satisfies the noncompact slenderness limit as
follows:
2 Dc E
5.7 Eq. (6.10.6.2.3-1)
tw Fyc
225.26 29,000
5.7
0.4375 50
115.47 < 137.27 (satisfied)
The section is nonslender (i.e. the section has a compact or noncompact web). Therefore, Eq.
6.10.3.2.1-3 (web bend-buckling) need not be checked.
69
8.3.1.3.1 Compression Flange:
Flange nominal yielding:
fbu + fl fRhFyc Eq. (6.10.3.2.1-1)
Since the section under consideration is homogeneous, the hybrid factor, Rh, is 1.0, as stated in
Article 6.10.1.10.1. Thus, Eq. 6.10.3.2.1-1 is evaluated as follows:
For Strength I:
13.41 17.99 (1.0)(1.0)(50)
31.40 ksi 50 ksi (satisfied)
For the Special Load Combination (Article 3.4.2.1):
15.02 18.31 (1.0)(1.0)(50)
Flexural Resistance:
1
fbu fl f Fnc Eq. (6.10.3.2.1-2)
3
As specified in Article 6.10.3.2.1, the nominal flexural resistance of the compression flange, Fnc,
is to be determined as specified in Article 6.10.8.2. For sections in straight I-girder bridges with
compact or noncompact webs, the lateral torsional buckling resistance may be taken as Mnc
determined as specified in Article A6.3.3 (Appendix A6) divided by the elastic section modulus
about the major axis of the section to the compression flange, Sxc. As mentioned in Article
C6.10.3.2.1, this may be useful for sections in bridges with compact or noncompact webs having
larger unbraced lengths, if additional lateral torsional buckling resistance is required beyond that
calculated based on the provisions of Article 6.10.8.2. However, for this particular example, the
increased lateral torsional buckling resistance obtained by using the provisions of Article A6.3.3
is not deemed to be necessary. Thus, the provisions of Article 6.10.8.2.3 will be used to compute
the lateral torsional buckling resistance for this check.
First, calculate the local buckling resistance of the top (compression) flange. Determine the
slenderness ratio of the top flange:
bfc
f Eq. (6.10.8.2.2-3)
2t fc
14
f 9.3
20.75
70
Determine the limiting slenderness ratio for a compact flange (alternatively, see Table
C6.10.8.2.2-1):
E
pf 0.38 Eq. (6.10.8.2.2-4)
Fyc
29,000
pf 0.38 9.2
50
Since f > pf,
Fyr f pf
Fnc 1 1 R R F Eq. (6.10.8.2.2-2)
R h Fyc rf pf b h yc

where: Fyr 0.7Fyc Fyw
Fyr 0.7(50) 35.0 ksi 50 ksi ok
Fyr must also not be less than 0.5Fyc = 0.5(50) = 25.0 ksi ok.
E
rf 0.56 Eq. (6.10.8.2.2-5)
Fyr
29,000
rf 0.56 16.1
35.0
As specified in Article 6.10.3.2.1, in computing Fnc for constructibility, the web load-shedding
factor Rb is to be taken equal to 1.0 because the flange stress is always limited to the web bend-
buckling stress according to Eq. 6.10.3.2.1-3. Therefore,
35.0 9.3 9.2

Fnc FLB 1 1 (1.0)(1.0)(50) 49.78 ksi
(1.0)(50) 16.1 9.2
For Strength I:
f bu f f Fnc FLB
1
3
1 17.99
f bu f 13.41 ksi ksi 19.41 ksi
3 3
f Fnc FLB 1.0(49.78) 49.78 ksi
19.41 ksi 49.78 ksi (satisfied)
71
f bu f f Fnc FLB
1
3
1 18.31
3 3
f Fnc FLB 1.0(49.78) 49.78 ksi
Next, determine the lateral torsional buckling resistance of the top (compression) flange within
the unbraced length under consideration. The limiting unbraced length, Lp, was computed earlier
to be 83.8 in. or 6.98 ft. The effective radius of gyration for lateral torsional buckling, rt, for the
non-composite section was also computed earlier to be 3.48 inches.
Determine the limiting unbraced length, Lr:
E
L r rt Eq. (6.10.8.2.3-5)
Fyr
where: Fyr 0.7Fyc Fyw
Fyr 0.7(50) 35.0 ksi 50 ksi ok
Fyr must also not be less than 0.5Fyc = 0.5(50) = 25.0 ksi ok.
(3.48) 29,000
Therefore: Lr 26.22 ft
12 35.0
Since Lp = 6.98 feet < Lb = 20.0 feet < Lr = 26.22 feet,
Fyr Lb Lp
Fnc Cb 1 1 R R F R R F Eq. (6.10.8.2.3-2)
R h Fyc Lr Lp
b h yc b h yc
As discussed previously, since fmid/f2 > 1 in the unbraced length under consideration, the
moment-gradient modifier, Cb, must be taken equal to 1.0. Therefore,
35.0 20.0 6.98

Fnc 1.01 1 1.0(1.0)(50) 39.85 ksi 1.0(1.0)(50) 50 ksi ok
1.0(50) 26.22 6.98
72
For Strength I:
f bu f f Fnc LTB
1
3
1 17.99
3 3
f Fnc LTB 1.0(39.85) 39.85 ksi
f bu f f Fnc LTB
1
3
1 18.31
3 3
f Fnc LTB 1.0(39.85) 39.85 ksi
8.3.1.3.2 Tension Flange:
Flange Nominal Yielding:
fbu fl f Rh Fyt Eq. (6.10.3.2.2-1)
For Strength I:
11.55 7.58 (1.0)(1.0)(50)
For the Special Load Combination (Article 3.4.2.1):
12.93 7.44 (1.0)(1.0)(50)
8.3.1.4 Shear (Article 6.10.3.3)
As previously stated, since the design does not require any transverse stiffeners, the shear check
under the construction loading is automatically satisfied.
8.3.2 Service Limit State (Article 6.10.4)
Service limit state requirements for steel I-girder bridges are specified in Article 6.10.4. The
evaluation of the positive bending region based on these requirements follows.
73
8.3.2.1 Elastic Deformations (Article 6.10.4.1)
Since the bridge is not designed to permit pedestrian traffic, the live load deflection will be
limited to L/800. It is shown below that the maximum deflection along the span length using the
service loads and a line girder approach is less than the L/800 limit. It is noted, however, that the
application of this requirement is optional.
= 0.610 in. < L/800 = (90 x 12 ) / 800 = 1.35 in.
8.3.2.2 Permanent Deformations (Article 6.10.4.2)
To control permanent deformations, flange stresses are limited according to Eq. 6.10.4.2.2-1 as
follows:
f f 0.95Rh Fyf Eq. (6.10.4.2.2-1)
M DC1 M DC 2 M DW 1.3M LL IM
where: f f
Snc Slt Sst
It is noted that the moment values in the above equation represent the moments resulting from
elastic analysis since it has previously been determined that moment redistribution is not
applicable at the service limit state.
The stress in the compression flange is shown below to equal 18.97 ksi, which satisfies the
requirements of Eq. 6.10.4.2.2-1.
ff
73812 147 12012 1.3216012 18.97 ksi
614 2,711 10,001
ff = 18.97 ksi 0.95RhFyf = 0.95(1.0)(50) = 47.5 ksi (satisfied)
Similarly, the stress in the tension flange is computed to equal 39.74 ksi, also satisfying Eq.
6.10.4.2.2-1 (f is equal to zero in this case).
ff
73812 147 12012 1.3216012 39.74 ksi
887.7 1,159 1,248
ff = 39.74 ksi 0.95RhFyf = 0.95(1.0)(50) = 47.5 ksi (satisfied)
For composite sections in positive flexure, since the web satisfies the requirement of Article
6.10.2.1.1 (i.e. D/tw 150) such that longitudinal stiffeners are not required, web bend-buckling
under the Service II load combination need not be checked at Section 1. Thus, all service limit
state requirements are satisfied.
74
8.3.3 Fatigue and Fracture Limit State (Article 6.10.5)
8.3.3.1 Load Induced Fatigue (Article 6.6.1.2)
The fatigue calculation procedures in the positive bending region are similar to those previously
presented for the negative bending region. In this section the fatigue requirements are evaluated
for the flange welds of a cross-frame connection plate located 40 feet from the abutment.
From Table 6.6.1.2.3-1, it is determined that this detail is classified as a fatigue Detail Category
C'. The constant-amplitude fatigue threshold, (F)TH, for a Category C' detail is 12 ksi (see Table
6.6.1.2.5-3).
For this example, an (ADTT)SL of 800 trucks per day is assumed. Since this (ADTT)SL exceeds
the value of 745 trucks per day specified in Table 6.6.1.2.3-2 for a Category C detail, the
nominal fatigue resistance for this particular detail is to be determined for the Fatigue I load
combination and infinite fatigue life using Eq. 6.6.1.2.5-1. Therefore:
Fn FTH Eq. (6.6.1.2.5-1)
Fn FTH 12.00ksi
Again, as discussed previously, the concrete deck will be assumed effective in computing all
dead load and live load stresses and live load stress ranges applied to the composite section in the
subsequent fatigue calculations.
At this location, the unfactored permanent loads produce compression at the top of the girder and
tension at the bottom of the girder. In this example, the effect of the future wearing surface is
conservatively ignored when determining if a detail is subject to a net applied tensile stress.
Bottom of Top Flange:
(702)(12)(25.26)
f DC1 13.32 ksi
15,969
(140)(12)(12.43)
f DC2 0.58 ksi
35,737
= -13.32 + -0.58 = -13.90 ksi
1.5 143(12)(4.13)
f LL IM 0.22 ksi
48.806
13.90 ksi 0.22 ksi fatigue does not need to be checked
75
Top of Bottom Flange:
5281237.87 1431237.87
f 1.50
48,806 48,806
(f) = 9.37 ksi (F)n = 12.00 ksi (satisfied)
8.3.3.2 Special Fatigue Requirement for Webs (Article 6.10.5.3)
As discussed previously, the following shear requirement must be satisfied at the fatigue limit
state:
V vVcr Eq. (6.10.5.3-1)
However this is an unstiffened web. Therefore, this limit does not control and is not explicitly
evaluated.
8.3.4 Strength Limit State (Article 6.10.6)
For compact sections in positive bending, Equation 6.10.7.1.1-1 must be satisfied at the strength
limit state.
1
Mu fl S xt f M n Eq. (6.10.7.1.1-1)
3
The lateral bending stresses are negligible for the straight, composite girder considered herein.
The following requirements must be satisfied for a section to qualify as compact:
Fy = 50 ksi 70 ksi (satisfied)
D 42.0
tw 0.4375
2 Dcp 2 0
0 3.76 E (satisfied)
tw 0.4375 Fyc
Therefore, the section is compact, and the nominal flexural resistance is based on Article
6.10.7.1.2. The following requirement must be evaluated.
Dp 0.1Dt
The plastic neutral axis was determined previously to be located 7.05 in. from the top of the
concrete deck. Therefore, the depth of the composite section in compression at the plastic
moment, Dp, is
76
Dp = 7.05 in.
Dt = total depth of the composite section
Dt = 8 + 2 + 42 + 1.25 = 53.25 in.
Dp = 7.05 > 0.1Dt = 0.1(53.25) =5.33 (not satisfied)
Therefore, the nominal flexural capacity is determined from.
Dp
M n M p 1.07 0.7 Eq. (6.10.7.1.2-2)
Dt
7.05
Mn 6,4161.07 0.7 6,270k - ft
53.25
Since the span under consideration and all adjacent interior-pier sections satisfy the requirements
of Article B6.2 (as determined previously), Mn is not limited to 1.3RhMy according to Eq.
6.10.7.1.2-3 in this case.
From elastic analysis procedures, the maximum positive moment under the Strength I load
combination is 4,192 k-ft., which is at a distance of 36 feet from the left support. The
redistribution moment must then be added to this moment to determine the total applied moment.
The redistribution moment varies linearly from zero at the end supports to a maximum at the
interior pier of 936 k-ft. Thus, the redistribution moment at 36' from the abutment is computed as
follows.
Mrd= 36/90*(936) = 0.4(936) = 374 k-ft
The total design moment is then the sum of the redistribution moment and the elastic moment.
Mu = 4,192 + 374 = 4,566 k-ft
The bending strength of the positive bending region is then shown to be sufficient.
Mu f M n
4,566 k-ft. (1.0)(6,270) = 6,270 k-ft (satisfied)
8.3.4.2 Ductility Requirement (6.10.7.3)
Sections in positive bending are also required to satisfy Eq. 6.10.7.3-1, which is a ductility
requirement intended to prevent premature crushing of the concrete slab.
Dp 0.42Dt Eq. (6.10.7.3-1)
Dp = 7.05 in. 0.42(53.25) = 22.37 in. (satisfied)
77
8.3.4.3 Shear (6.10.6.3)
The shear requirements at the strength limit state are expressed by:
Vu vVn Eq. (6.10.9.1-1)
where: Vn = Vcr
Vcr = shear buckling resistance (kip)
Vcr = CVp (for unstiffened webs) Eq. (6.10.9.2-1)
Vp = plastic shear force (kip)
Vp = 0.58 FywDtw Eq. (6.10.9.2-2)
C = ratio of the shear buckling resistance to the shear yield strength

determined as specified in Article 6.10.9.3.2, with the shear buckling
coefficient, k, taken equal to 5.0
The computation of C is based on the web slenderness classification. Thus, the web slenderness
is first evaluated in terms of the following equation.
D Ek
1.12
tw Fyw
D 42.0
96.0 1.12 Ek 1.12 (29,000)(5) 60.31 (not satisfied)
tw 0.4375 Fyw 50
The web slenderness is next evaluated in terms of the following equation.
Ek D Ek
1.12 96.0 1.40
Fyw tw Fyw
Ek D Ek
1.12 60.31 96.0 1.40 75.4 (not satisfied)
Fyw tw Fyw
Lastly, the web slenderness is evaluated as follows.
D Ek
96.0 1.40 75.4 (satisfied)
tw Fyw
Thus, C is calculated according to Eq. 6.10.9.3.2-6.
78
1.57 Ek 1.57
C 2 (2,900) 0.494 Eq. (6.10.9.3.2-6)
D Fyw (96.0)
2
t
w
Therefore, the shear capacity is equal to:
Vcr = CVp =(0.494)(0.58)(50)(42) (0.4375) = 263.2 kips
V = 257 kips vVcr = (1.0)(263.2) = 263.2 kips (satisfied)
Thus, the shear requirements at the strength limit state (and consequently all other limit states as
previously discussed) are satisfied.
8.4 Cross-frame Design
The cross-frames alone provide restoring forces during construction to enable the girders to
deflect equally. Once the system acts compositely, the concrete slab also contributes to providing
restoring forces and continuously braces the top flanges at the girder. Although several styles of
cross-frames may be used (refer to Chapter 8 for a more complete discussion), a typical K-
shaped cross-frame (as shown in Figure 17) is used for this example. The design of the
intermediate and end cross-frames is demonstrated in the sections that follow.
Figure 17 Intermediate Cross Frame
8.4.1 Intermediate Cross-frame Design
This section describes the design process for an intermediate cross-frame. The cross-frames are
most critical while the system is in the non-composite stage under wind loading. The wind load
per unit length on the bottom flange is given by Article 4.6.2.7.
79
PD d (0.050)( 44.25 12)
w = = 0.092k/ft.
2 2
8.4.1.1 Bottom Strut
The bottom strut is in compression under the wind loading; therefore, the limiting slenderness
ratio for bracing members in compression must be satisfied as specified in Article 6.9.3.
A L 4x4x 5/16 single angle is selected for the bottom strut. Section properties are calculated
below and depicted in Figure 18. In these computations it is assumed that the connection plate is
-inch thick.
A = 2.40 in.2
rz = 0.781 in.
Iz = Arz2 = (2.40)(0.781)2 = 1.46 in.4
Iw = Ix + Iy Iz = 3.67 + 3.67 1.46 = 5.88 in.4
Iw 5.88
rw = 1.57in.
A 2.40
rx = ry = 1.24 in.
Figure 18 Single Angle for Intermediate Cross Frame
The horizontal wind force applied to the brace point can be calculated in the following manner,
where Lb is taken as the maximum cross frame spacing and the wind load per unit length (w) is
0.092 k/ft, as previously determined:
80
Pw = wLb = (0.092)(20.0) = 1.84 kips
The bottom struts in the exterior bays of the system must carry the entire wind force P w;
therefore, all of the bottom struts will be conservatively designed to satisfy the requirements of
the exterior bay struts.
The Strength III load combination controls the cross-frame design for wind due to having the
largest load factor for wind, which is specified to be 1.40. The following calculation determines
the factored axial wind force in the bottom strut, including the factor.
Pu = 1.00(1.40)(1.84) = 2.58 kips
Connected through one leg only, the strut is eccentrically loaded. The member then experiences
both flexure and axial compression.
Check the slenderness provision of Article 6.9.4.2.1 for the cross frame bottom strut member:
b E
k Eq. (6.9.4.2.1-1)
t Fy
where: k = plate buckling coefficient, 0.45 for outstanding legs of single angles from
Table 6.9.4.2.1-1
b = the full width of the outstanding leg for a single angle (in.)
t = plate thickness (in.)
b 4 29000
7.1 0.45 10.8 OK. Member is nonslender.
t 0.5625 50
Check the limiting slenderness ratio of Article 6.9.3. As a secondary compression member, the
angle must satisfy the following:
K
140
r
where: K = effective length factor specified in Article 4.6.2.5 taken as 1.0 for single angles
regardless of end connection (in.)
= unbraced length (in.)
r = minimum radius of gyration (in.)
K 1.0(9)(12)
138 140 OK
r 0.781
81
8.4.1.1.1 Combined Axial Compression and Bending
Having satisfied the basic slenderness provisions, the angle is then checked for the strength limit
state in accordance with Article 6.9.4.4 regarding single-angle members.
Single angles are commonly used as members in cross frames of steel girder bridges. Since the
angle is typically connected through one leg only, the member is subjected to combined axial
load and flexure. In other words, the eccentricity of the applied axial load induces moments
about both principal axes of the angle. As a result, it is difficult to predict the nominal
compressive resistance of these members. The provisions of Article 6.9.4.4 provide a simplified
approach by permitting the effect of the eccentricities to be neglected when the single angles are
evaluated as axially loaded compression members for flexural buckling only using an appropriate
specified effective slenderness ratio, (K/r)eff, in place of (K/rs) in Eq. 6.9.4.1.2-1. By
following this approach, the single angles may be designed as axially loaded compression
members for flexural buckling only according to the provisions of Articles 6.9.2.1, 6.9.4.1.1, and
6.9.4.1.2. It should be noted that according to Article 6.9.4.4, the actual maximum slenderness
ratio of the angle, not the effective slenderness ratio, is not to exceed the limiting slenderness
ratio specified in Article 6.9.3, as checked above. Also, per Article 6.9.4.4, single angles
designed using (K/r)eff need not be checked for flexural-torsional buckling.
Compute the effective slenderness ratio per Article 6.9.4.4 based on the criteria for equal-leg
angles. First, check the /rx limit of 80:
(9)(12)
87.1 80
rx 1.24
where: rx = radius of gyration about the geometric axis of the angle parallel to the connected leg
(Although not relevant for equal-leg angles, the term rx may actually equal ry when
unequal-leg angles are used.)
Therefore, compute the effective slenderness ratio as follows:
K
32 1.25 Eq. (6.9.4.4-2)
r eff rx
K (9)(12)
32 1.25 141
r eff 1.24
In accordance with the provisions for single-angle members in Article 6.9.4.4 and using the
effective slenderness ratio, (K/r)eff, the factored resistance of the angle in compression is taken
as:
Pr c Pn Eq. (6.9.2.1-1)
82
where: Pn = nominal compressive resistance determined using the provisions of Article 6.9.4.1.1
c = resistance factor for compression as specified in Article 6.5.4.2
To compute Pn, first compute Pe and Po. Pe is the elastic critical buckling resistance determined
as specified in Article 6.9.4.1.2 for flexural buckling, which is the applicable buckling mode for
single angles. Po is the equivalent nominal yield resistance equal to QFyAg, where Q is the
slender element reduction factor determined as specified in Article 6.9.4.2. Q is taken as 1.0 in
this case according to Article 6.9.4.2.1 since the angle member is nonslender per Eq. 6.9.4.2.1-1.
2 E
Pe 2
Ag Eq. (6.9.4.1.2-1)
K

s
r
where (Kl/r)eff is used in place of (Kl/rs) in the denominator.
2E 2 (29000)
Pe Ag (2.40) 34.6 kips
K
2 1412

r eff
Po = QFyAg = (1.0)(50)(2.4) = 120 kips
Since
Pe 34.6
0.288 0.44 ,
Po 120
the nominal axial resistance in compression is computed as:
Pn 0.877Pe Eq. (6.9.4.1.1-2)
Pn = 0.877(34.6) = 30.3 kips
Compute the factored axial resistance of the angle in compression as follows:
Pr = cPn = 0.95(30.3) = 28.8 kips
Pu = |-2.58kips| < Pr = 28.8 kips OK
8.4.1.2 Diagonals
The diagonals carry a compressive force that is the result of wind loads and reactions from the
loads carried in the top strut. It is assumed that each bay carries a portion of Pw, and the two
diagonals carry equal loads. From statics the following equation can be derived to determine the
axial force in the diagonals.
83
P
Pw diag . a 2 b2 w
2na
where:
a = one-half the transverse girder spacing
b = vertical distance between working points for the diagonals
Pw = total applied wind-load force
n = number of bays
10.0 (12)
2
1.84
Pw diag . (30)
2
0.34kips
2 2(3) 10.0(12) 2
The axial force in each diagonal due to the wind loading under the Strength III load combination
is as follows:
Pu = 1.00(1.40)(0.34) = 0.48 kips
The unbraced length of the diagonal in compression, taken as the distance between the working
points, is calculated below:
2
10.0(12)
l (30.0) 67.08in.
2
A similar analysis was conducted for the diagonals as was conducted for the bottom strut, and
the L4x4x5/16 member was determined to be adequate for the design wind loading.
8.4.2 End Cross-frame Design
The lateral wind forces are transmitted from the deck to the substructure by the end cross-frames.
The following section describes the design of end cross-frames (see Figure 19).
84
Figure 19 End Cross Frame
8.4.2.1 Top Strut
The top strut of the end cross-frames carries the compressive forces that are a result of the wind
load on the structure and vehicles, dead load of the slab, including the haunch, and the wheel
loads, including the dynamic load allowance. The total wind pressure PD, calculated previously,
is 0.050 ksf. The total height of the structure is as follows:
Barrier = 42.00 in.

Deck = 8.50 in.
Haunch = 2.00 in.
Girder - top flange = 43.25 in.
= 93.75 in. = 7.98 ft
The wind load per unit length on the structure is computed as follows:
ws = (7.98)(0.050) = 0.40 kips/ft
From Article 3.8.1.3, the wind load per unit length acting normal to the vehicles at a distance of
6.0 feet above the roadway is:
wL = 0.10 kips/ft
The wind load on the end cross-frames is assumed to be half of the total wind load and is
computed below.
90.0
PWL 0.40 18.0kips
2
85
90.0
PWL 0.10 4.5kips
2
Each bay is assumed to carry an equal portion of the wind load; therefore, the axial force in the
top strut is calculated as follows:
(PWS)top strut = 18.00/3 = 6.00 kips
(PWL)top strut = 4.50/3 = 1.50 kips
The dead load from the slab, concrete haunch, and steel girder acting on the top strut is computed
below:
Slab = 8.50 (14.00 + 12.00 + 7.50)(1/144)(0.150) = 0.30

Concrete Haunch = 7.50 (14.00 + 12.00 + 7.50/2)(1/144)(0.150) = 0.23
Steel Girder = 0.03
= 0.56 kip/ft.
As specified in Article 3.6.1.2.4, the design lane is a 0.64 kips/ft. load distributed over a 10.0
foot width.
0.64 7.50
wLL 14.0 12.0 0.16 kips/ft
10.0(12) 2
The design truck wheel load plus the dynamic load allowance is discussed in Article 3.6.1.2.2
and is as follows.
32.0
PLL (1.33) 21.28kips
2
Figure 20 illustrates the position of the above computed live loads that produce the maximum
moment and shear in the strut. The maximum moments and reactions in the top strut are given as
follows.
MDC = 1.75 k-ft
MLL+IM = 18.30 k-ft
RDC = 3.50 kips
RLL+IM = 25.1 kips
86
Figure 20 Live load on Top Strut
The Strength I load combination governs the design of the top strut of the end cross-frame
design. Thus, the controlling moments and shears are computed as follows.
8.4.2.1.1 Strength I:
Mu = 1.00[1.25(1.75) + 1.75(18.30)] =34.21 k-ft
3.5 25.1
Vu 1.0 1.25 1.75 24.15kips
2 2
To choose a preliminary member for the top strut, the required section modulus assuming the
moment capacity of the member is Mp is computed.
M r f M n f M p f Fy Z
34.2(12)
Z 8.21in.
1.0(50)
In addition to meeting the flexural requirements, the minimum material thickness requirements
must also be considered when selecting the member. Therefore, a W10 x 19 is selected as a trial
member.
To determine the flexural capacity of the W10x19 section, the applicability of Appendix A6 is
first evaluated.
Fy = 50 ksi 70 ksi
2 Dc 2(9.41/ 2)
37.64 5.7 E 137.3 Eq. (A6.1-1)
tw 0.25 Fyc
Therefore, Appendix A6 is applicable. The web slenderness is then evaluated based on Eq.
A6.2.1-1.
87
2 Dcp
pw( DCP ) Eq. (A6.2.1-1)
tw
E
Fyc D
pw(Dcp ) rw cp
2
Eq. (A6.2.1-2)
Mp Dc
0.54 0.09
RhMy

29000
50 9.41/ 2
pw(D cp ) 88.92 137.3 137.3
(21.6)(50)
2 9.41/ 2
0.54 0.09
(1.0)(18.8)(50)
2Dcp 29.41/ 2
37.64 88.92 (satisfied)
tw 0.25
Therefore, the web is compact and the web plastification factors are thus computed as follows.
Mp (21.6)(50)
Rpc 1.149 Eq. (A6.2.1-3)
M yc (18.8)(50)
Mp (21.6)(50)
Rpt 1.149 Eq. (A6.2.1-4)
M yt (18.8)(50)
The flange slenderness must also be evaluated. The following calculations show that the
compression flange is compact.
pf 0.38 E F 9.15
yc
b fc 4.02
f 5.09 9.15 (satisfied)
2t fc 2(0.395)
Therefore, the flexural capacity of the section based on local buckling is equal to the product of
the web plastification factor and the yield moment, as specified in Eq. A6.3.2-1.
M nc ( FLB ) Rpc M yc 1.149(50)(18.8) /12 90.0k-ft.
The flexural capacity based on lateral torsional buckling must also be investigated. Alternative
equations are used to compute the lateral torsional buckling capacity based on the unbraced
length. The unbraced length classifications are based on the value of rt.
88
b fc 4.02
rt 1.039in. Eq. (A6.3.3-10)
1 D t 1 (9.41/ 2)(0.25)
12 1 c w 12
3 b fc t fc 3 (4.02)(0.395)

The lateral bracing distance is classified as compact if Eq. A6.3.3-4 is satisfied.
Lp rt E 25.03in. Eq. (A6.3.3-4)

Fyc
Lb = (5.0)(12) = 60 in. > 25.03 in. (not satisfied)
Therefore, the lateral bracing distance is next evaluated compared to the non-compact lateral
bracing limit.
2
E J Fyr S xc h
Lb 60 Lr 1.95rt 1 1 6.76 Eq. (A6.3.3-5)
Fyr S xc h EJ
S
where: Fyr min 0.7 Fyc , Rh Fyt xt , Fyw
S xc
18.8
Fyr min 0.7(50),(1.0)(50) ,50 min 35,50,50 35.0ksi
18.8
1 3 t t
J Dt w b fc t fc 1 0.63 fc b ft t ft 3 1 0.63 ft
3
Eq. (A6.3.3-9)
3 b fc b ft
J
1
3
(9.41)(0.25)3 2(4.02)(.395)3 .938 0.204in.3
h 9.81in.
2
29,000 0.204 35 (18.8)(9.81)
Lr 1.95(1.039) 1 1 6.76 110in.
35 (18.8)(9.81) 29,000 0.204
Lb 60in. Lr 110in.
Therefore, the lateral torsional buckling resistance is controlled by Eq. A6.3.3-2.
Fyr S xc Lb - Lp
M nc Cb 1- 1- Rpc M yc R pc M yc
Rpc M yc Lr - Lp

Rpc M yc (1.149)(50)(18.8) 1,080k-ft.
89
(35)(18.8) 60 25.03
M nc 1 911.7 k-ft.
(1.149)(50)(18.8) 112.7 25.03
M nc ( LTB ) 911.7k-in. 75.9k-ft.
Comparing the flange local buckling and lateral torsional buckling capacities, it is determined
that the lateral torsional buckling capacity controls the design of the top strut.
Mnc = min(90.0, 75.9)
fMnc = (1.0)(75.9) = 75.9 k-ft.
Thus, the moment capacity is sufficient.
fMnc = 75.9 k-ft. > Mu = 34.21 k-ft. (satisfied)
In addition to the flexural capacity, the shear capacity must be evaluated to ensure the member is
acceptable. The shear capacity of the member is computed below:
Vn Vcr CVp Eq. (6.10.9.2-1)
where: Vp 0.58Fyw Dtw 0.58(50)(9.41)(0.25) 68.22kips Eq. (6.10.9.2-2)
The formula used to compute C varies depending on the web slenderness as shown below.
Ek (29,000)(5.0)
1.12 1.12 60.31
Fyw 50
D 9.41
37.64 60.31
tw 0.25
Therefore, C = 1.0
vVn (1.0)(68.22) 68.22kips Vu 24.15kips (satisfied)
Thus, the shear requirements are satisfied.
The member must also be evaluated for combined axial compression and flexure, for which the
Strength III and Strength V load combinations are most likely to govern.
8.4.2.1.2 Strength III:
Pu = 1.00[1.25(0.00) + 1.40(6.00)] = 8.40 kips
Mux = 1.00[1.25(1.75) + 1.40(0.00)] = 2.19 k-ft.
90
Article 6.9.2.1 specifies the axial capacity as follows.
Pr = cPn Eq. (6.9.2.1-1)
where: c = 0.95
Check the slenderness provision of Article 6.9.4.2.1 for the cross-frame top strut member:
b E
k Eq. (6.9.4.2.1-1)
t Fy
where: k = plate buckling coefficient, 0.56 for flanges of rolled sections and 1.49 for webs of
rolled sections from Table 6.9.4.2.1-1
b = half flange width for flanges and clear distance between flanges minus the corner
radius for webs (in.)
b 4.02/2 29000
5.09 0.56 13.5 OK. Flanges are nonslender.
t 0.395 50
b (10.2- 2(0.695)) 29000

35.24 1.49 35.88 OK. Web is nonslender.
t 0.250 50
Q = 1.0
2E 2 (29000)
Pe Ag (5.62) 168 kips
2 2
K 0.75(9.5)(12)

r 0.874
s
Po = QFyAg = (1.0)(50)(5.62) = 281 kips
Since
Pe 168
0.60 0.44 ,
Po 281
Po
281
P
Pn 0.658 e Po 0.658168 (281) 139.5 kips
Eq. (6.9.4.1.1-1)

91
Compute the factored axial resistance of the top strut in compression as follows:
Pr = cPn = 0.95(139.5) = 132.5 kips
The factored moment resistance, Mrx, was computed previously to be:
Mrx = 75.9 k-ft.
The combined influence of axial force and moment must then satisfy the following equation.
Pu 8.4
0.06 0.2
Pr 132.5
Pu M ux
1.0 Eq. (6.9.2.2-1)
2 Pr M rx
8.4 2.19
2(132.5) 75.9
8.4.2.1.3 Strength V:
Similarly, the applied axial force and moment due to the Strength V load combination are
computed below.
Pu = 1.00[1.25(0.00) + 1.35(0.00) + 1.40(6.00) + 0.40(1.50)] = 9.00 kips
Mux = 1.00[1.25(1.75) + 1.35(18.30) + 0.40(0.00) + 1.40(0.00)] = 26.89 k-ft.
The axial load and moment interaction equation 6.9.2.2-1 is also shown to be satisfied for this
load combination below.
9.0 26.89
2(132.5) 75.9
8.4.2.2 Diagonals
The diagonals carry a compressive force that is the result of wind loads and reactions from the
loads carried in the top strut. The geometry of the end cross-frames was previously illustrated in
Figure 19. As previously discussed, the design of the cross-frame is based on the assumption that
each bay carries an equal portion of the total wind forces. The axial force is computed below
using the same process used earlier in this cross-frame design example.
PWS 18.0kips
PWL 4.5kips
92
P
PW diag. a 2 b2 W
2na
10.0(12)
2
18.0
WS diag.
P 30
2
3.35kips
2 2(3) 10.0(12) 2
10.0(12)
2
4.5
WL diag.
P 30
2
0.84kips
2 2(3) 10.0(12) 2
The axial force in the diagonal as a result of the dead-load reaction RDC on the top strut is
computed below.
2 3.5
2
10.0(12)
PDC diag. 30 3.91kips
2 2(30)
The axial force in the diagonal as a result of the live-load reaction RLL+IM on the top strut is
computed as follows.
2 25.1
2
10.0(12)
PLL IM diag. 30 28.06kips
2 2(30)
The following calculations determine the controlling load combination.
8.4.2.2.1 Strength I:
Pu = 1.00[1.25(3.91) + 1.75(28.06)] = 54.0 kips (governs)
8.4.2.2.2 Strength III:
Pu = 1.00[1.25(3.91) + 1.40(3.35)] = 9.58 kips
8.4.2.2.3 Strength V:
Pu = 1.00[1.25(3.91) + 1.35(28.06) + 0.40(3.35) + 0.40(0.84)] = 44.4 kips
The initial member selection will be based on the compressive strength slenderness requirements
of the member and minimum material thickness requirements. The distance between the working
points will be taken as the unbraced length l.
K
140
r
where: K = effective length factor specified in Article 4.6.2.5 as 1.0 for single angles
regardless of end connection (in.)
93
= unbraced length (in.)
r = minimum radius of gyration (in.)
2
10.0(12)
l 30 67.08in.
2
1.0(67.08)
rmin 0.479 in.
140
Thus an L4 x 4 x 5/8 is selected as the trial member, assuming a -inch connection plate.
Similarly to the bottom strut of the intermediate cross frames, the member must be evaluated for
the combined influences of flexure and axial compression as detailed below. The necessary
cross sectional properties for the L4 x 4 x 5/8 are listed below:
rx = ry = 1.20 in.
rz = 0.774 in.
As = 4.61 in.2
Check the slenderness provision of Article 6.9.4.2.1 for the cross frame diagonal member:
b E
k Eq. (6.9.4.2.1-1)
t Fy
where: k = plate buckling coefficient, 0.45 for outstanding legs of single angles, from
Table 6.9.4.2.1-1
b = the full width of the outstanding leg for a single angle (in.)
b 4 29000
6.4 0.45 10.8 OK. Member is nonslender.
t 0.625 50
8.4.2.2.4 Combined Axial Compression and Flexure
Compute the effective slenderness ratio per Article 6.9.4.4 based on the criteria for equal-leg
angles. First, check the /rx limit of 80:
(67.08)
55.96 80
rx 1.20
where: rx = radius of gyration about the geometric axis of the angle parallel to the connected leg
(Although not relevant for equal-leg angles, the term rx may actually equal ry when
unequal-leg angles are used.)
94
Therefore, compute the effective slenderness ratio as follows:
K
72 0.75 Eq. (6.9.4.4-1)
r eff rx
K (67.08)
72 0.75 114
r eff 1.20
In accordance with the provisions for single-angle members in Article 6.9.4.4 and using the
effective slenderness ratio, (k/r)eff, the factored resistance of the angle in compression is taken
as:
Pr c Pn Eq. (6.9.2.1-1)
where: Pn = nominal compressive resistance determined using the provisions of Article 6.9.4.1.1
c = resistance factor for compression as specified in Article 6.5.4.2
To compute Pn, first compute Pe and Po. Pe is the elastic critical buckling resistance determined
as specified in Article 6.9.4.1.2 for flexural buckling, which is the applicable buckling mode for
single angles. Po is the equivalent nominal yield resistance equal to QFyAg, where Q is the
slender element reduction factor determined as specified in Article 6.9.4.2. Q is taken as 1.0 in
this case according to Article 6.9.4.2.1 since the angle member is nonslender per Eq. 6.9.4.2.1-1.
2 E
Pe 2
Ag Eq. (6.9.4.1.2-1)
K

rs
where (Kl/r)eff is used in place of (Kl/rs) in the denominator.
2E 2 (29000)
Pe Ag (4.61) 101.5 kips
K
2 1142

r eff
Po = QFyAg = (1.0)(50)(4.61) = 230.5 kips
Since
Pe 101.5
0.44 0.44 ,
Po 230.5
95

Po
Pn 0.658 e Po
P
Eq. (6.9.4.1.1-1)

230.5

Pn 0.658 101.5 (230.5) 89.1 kips

Compute the factored axial resistance of the angle in compression as follows:
Pr = cPn = 0.95(89.1) = 84.6 kips
Pu = |-54 kips| < Pr = 84.6 kips OK
Therefore, the end cross frame diagonal member is acceptable.
8.5 Stiffener Design
8.5.1 Bearing Stiffener Design
Bearing stiffeners must be provided at locations of concentrated loads for the webs of sections
that do not satisfy the provisions of Article D6.5. Specifically, Article D6.5 specifies the web
strength of steel I-girders with respect to the limit states of web local yielding and web crippling.
Both of these limit states are evaluated below for the abutment and pier locations, assuming a 10
in. bearing length at each location.
The requirement to prevent web local yielding is expressed by Eq. D6.5.2-1.
Ru < bRn
For interior-pier reactions, the web local yielding capacity, Rn, is given by Eq. D6.5.2-2 as
follows:
Rn = (5k + N)Fywtw
where:
k = distance from the outer face of the flange resisting the bearing force to the web
toe of the fillet
= 1.25 + 0.3125 = 1.5625 in
N = bearing length = 10 in.
Fyw = 50 ksi
96
tw = 0.5 in.
Substituting the above values into Eq. D6.5.2-2 gives the following.
Rn = [(5)(1.5625) + 10](50)(0.5)
Rn = 445 kips
Then evaluating Eq. D6.5.2-1, where b is equal to 1.00 and Ru at the pier is equal to 337 kips,
shows that the web yielding requirements are satisfied at the pier.
337 kips < (1.00)(445) = 445 kips (satisfied)
For evaluating the web yielding capacity at the abutments, Equation D6.5.2-3 is used as follows:
Rn = (2.5k + N)Fywtw (D6.5.2-2)
Rn = [(2.5)(1.5625) + 10](50)(0.4375)
Rn = 304 kips
Again evaluating Eq. D6.5.2-1, where Ru at the pier is equal to 258 kips, shows that the web
yielding requirements are also satisfied at the abutments.
The requirements to prevent web crippling are expressed by Eq. D6.5.3-1.
Ru < wRn
For interior pier reactions, the web crippling capacity, Rn, is given by Eq. D6.5.3-2 as follows:
1.5

N tw EFywt f
Rn 0.8t 1 3
2
d t f
w
tw

where: d = depth of the steel section = 44.375 in.
tf = thickness of the flange resisting the concentrated load = 1.25 in.
10 0.5 (29,000)(50)(1.25)
1.5
Rn 0.8(0.5)2 1 3 446kips
44.375 1.25 0.5
Evaluation of Eq. D6.5.3-1 where w is equal to 0.80 then shows that the pier section has
sufficient web crippling resistance.
97
For abutment reactions, Rn is expressed by either Eq. D6.5.3-3 or D6.5.3-4 depending on the
ratio between the bearing length and the steel section depth. For the present example with N/d =
10/44 = 0.23 at the abutments, Eq. D6.5.3-4 applies as follows:
tw EFywt f
1.5
4 N
Rn 0.4t 1 3
2
0.2 Eq. (D6.5.3-4)
t f
w
d tw

(4)(10) 0.4375 (29,000)(50)(1.25)

1.5
Rn 0.4(0.4375)2 1 3 2 179kips
44 1.25 0.4375
Evaluating Eq. D6.5.3-1 at the abutments thus shows that bearing stiffeners must be provided to
prevent web crippling.
258 kips > (0.80)(179) = 143 kips (not satisfied)
The bearing stiffeners are typically plates welded to both sides of the web that extend the full
depth of the web, and are as close to the outer edges of the flanges as practical. The plates are to
bear against or to be welded to the flange that the load is transmitted through. This example
illustrates the design of bearing stiffeners at Abutment 1.
8.5.1.1 Projecting Width (Article 6.10.11.2.2)
The width, bt, of projecting stiffener elements must satisfy the following:
E
bt 0.48t p Eq. (6.10.11.2.2-1)
Fys
It will be assumed that 6 inches wide plates are welded to each side of the web. Eq. 6.10.11.2.2-1
is then rearranged to determine the minimum allowable thickness of the stiffener.
t
p min.
bt

6.0
0.52in.
0.48 E 0.48 29,000
Fys 50
Thus, a 6 inch by 5/8 inch plate will be used to evaluate the bearing stiffener requirements.
8.5.1.2 Bearing Resistance (Article 6.10.11.2.3)
The factored resistance for the bearing stiffeners is to be taken as:
Rsb r b Rsb n Eq. (6.10.11.2.3-1)
where: b = resistance factor for bearing =1.0 (Article 6.5.4.2)
(Rsb)n = nominal bearing resistance for bearing stiffeners
98
= 1.4ApnFys Eq. (6.10.11.2.3-2)
Apn = area of the projecting elements for the stiffener outside of the web-to-
flange fillet welds but not beyond the edge of the flange
In this design example, it is assumed the clip provided at the base of the stiffener to clear the
web-to-flange weld is 1.5 inches in length.
Apn = 2(6.0 - 1.5)(0.625) = 5.63 in.2
(Rsb)n = 1.4(5.63)(50) = 394 kips
(Rsb)r = (1.00)(394) = 394 kips > Ru = 258 kips (satisfied)
The 6 inch by 5/8 inch bearing stiffeners have adequate bearing resistance.
8.5.1.3 Axial Resistance of Bearing Stiffeners (Article 6.10.11.2.4)
The factored axial resistance is calculated from Article 6.9.2.1 of the specifications, where the
radius of gyration is computed about the mid-thickness of the web, and the effective length is
taken as 0.75D. For stiffeners welded to the web, part of the web is considered in the effective
column section. The strip of web included in the effective column is not more than 9tw on each
side of the stiffeners. Therefore, the area of the effective column section is computed below:
As = 2[(6.0)(0.625) + 9(0.4375)(0.4375)] = 10.95 in.2
The moment of inertia of the effective column section is computed as follows:
0.625(6.0 0.4375 6.0)3

Is 100.2in.4
12
The radius of gyration computed about the mid-thickness of the web is computed as:
Is 100.2
rs 3.03 in.
As 10.95
The effective length is computed as follows:
Kl = 0.75D = 0.75(42.0) = 31.50 in.
The bearing stiffeners must satisfy the limiting slenderness ratio, stated in Article 6.9.3, which is
120 for main members in compression.
Kl 31.5
rs 3.03
As previously mentioned, the factored axial resistance of the effective column section is
calculated from Article 6.9.2.1 using the specified minimum yield strength of the stiffener.
99
Pr = cPn Eq. (6.9.2.1-1)
where:
c = resistance factor for axial compression = 0.95 (Article 6.5.4.2)
Pn = nominal compressive resistance from Article 6.9.4.1
Determine Pn using Article 6.9.4.1. First, determine the elastic critical buckling load, Pe, per
Article 6.9.4.1.2 as follows:
2E
Pe 2
Ag Eq. (6.9.4.1.2-1)
K

rs
2 29000
Pe 10.95 2,646kips
10.402
Po = QFyAg Article 6.9.4.1.1
where,
Po = Equivalent nominal yield resistance
Q= Slender Element Reduction factor, taken as 1.0 for bearing stiffeners
Po = QFyAg = (1.0)(50)(10.95) = 547.5 kips
Pe / Po = 2646 / 547.5 = 4.83 > 0.44
Therefore, Eq. 6.9.4.1.1-1 applies.

Po
P
Pn 0.658 e Po Eq. (6.9.4.1.1-1)

Pe 0.658547.5 / 2646 547.5 502.1 kip
Pr = 0.95(502.1) = 477 kips > Ru = 258 kips (satisfied)
100
8.5.1.4 Bearing Stiffener-to-Web Welds
Adequate shear strength of the welds joining the bearing stiffener to the web must also be
verified. First the weld shear strength, which is the area of the weld multiplied by 60 percent of
the yield strength of the weld metal, is determined.
Rr = 0.6e2Fexx Eq. (6.13.3.2.4b-1)
where:
e2 = resistance factor for shear in the throat of the weld metal = 0.80
Fexx= classification strength of the weld metal = 70 ksi for this example
Rr = 0.6(0.80)(70) 33.6 ksi
The minimum size fillet weld permissible in this situation is 0.25 inches, according to Table
6.13.3.4-1. Using this weld size the shear strength per unit length of weld is as follows.
V = 33.6(0.707)(0.25) = 5.94 k/in.
The length of the weld, allowing 2.5 inches for clips at both the top and bottom of the stiffener,
is:
L = 42.0 2(2.5) = 37.0 in.
The total factored resistance of the weld connecting the stiffener to the web of the section is then
879 kips which is greater than the required shear strength of 258 kips.
4(37.0)(5.94) = 879.1 kips > 258 kips (satisfied)
8.6 Flange-to-Web Weld Design
This section outlines the weld design for the web-to-flange junction. The weld design resistance
is checked against the factored shear flow associated with the design loads. The horizontal shear
flow at the end bearing is computed from the following equation:
VQ
s
I
where:
V = shear force (kips)
Q = statical moment of the area about the neutral axis (in.3)
I = moment of inertia (in.4)
101
Similar to previous calculations, the shear flow will be computed by considering the cross
sectional properties applicable to various applied forces. Thus, the statical moment of the area
about the neutral axis will be computed for each applicable section.
8.6.1 Steel Section:
Top Flange: Q = (10.50)(25.63) = 269.1 in.3
Bottom Flange: Q = (20.0)(17.37) = 347.4 in.3
8.6.2 Long-term Section:
Top Flange: Q = (10.50)(12.81) = 134.5 in.3
Slab: Q = (34.0)(18.43) = 626.6 in.3

761.1 in.3
8.6.3 Short-term Section:
Top Flange: Q = (10.50)(4.51) = 47.4 in.3
Slab: Q = (102)(10.13) = 1033.3 in.3

1080.7 in.3
The shear flow under each loading is thus computed as follows, where it is determined that the
top flange experiences the highest level of shear flow.
Top Flange:
DC1: s = (1.25)(44)(269.1)/15,969 = 0.93
DC2: s = (1.25)(7)(761.1)/35,737 = 0.19
DW: s = (1.5)(9)(761.1)/35,737 = 0.29
LL+IM s = (1.75)(103)(1080.7)/48,806 = 4.00
= 5.41 kip/in
102
Bottom Flange:
DC1: s = (1.25)(44)(347.4)/15,969 = 1.20
DC2: s = (1.25)(7)(604.0)/35,737 = 0.15
DW: s = (1.5)(9)(604.0)/35,737 = 0.23
LL+IM s = (1.75)(103)(770.0)/48,806 = 2.84
= 4.42 kip/in
Thus, the applied shear flow of 5.41 k/in., must be evaluated in comparison to the shear
resistance of the fillet welds and the shear rupture resistance of the base metal. The specifications
limit the minimum size of a fillet weld in which the base metal is thicker than 0.75" to 5/16."
Therefore, a 5/16" fillet weld is assumed on each side of the plate. The factored shear resistance
of the weld metal is determined as follows:
Rr = 0.6e2Fexx Eq. (6.13.3.2.4b-1)
where:
e2 = resistance factor for shear on the throat of the weld metal
= 0.80 (Article 6.5.4.2)
Fexx = classification strength of the weld metal= 70 ksi
Rr = 0.6(0.80)(70) = 33.6 ksi
The allowable shear flow for the 5/16 inch welds is:
v = 33.6(0.707)(0.3125)(2) = 14.85 k/in.
From Article 6.13.5.3, the factored shear rupture resistance of the connected material is
computed as follows:
Rr = vu0.58RpFuAvn Eq. (6.13.5.3-2)
where:
Avn = net area of the connection element subject to shear (equal to the gross area for
welded connections)
Fu = tensile strength of the connection element specified in Table 6.4.1-1
vu= resistance factor for shear rupture of connection elements = 0.80
103
Rp = reduction factor for holes taken equal to 0.90 for bolt holes punched full size and
1.0 for bolt holes drilled full size or subpunched and reamed to size (equal to 1.0
for welded connections)
The factored shear rupture resistance of the connected material is therefore:
v = (0.80)(0.58)(1.0)(70)(0.4375) = 14.21 k/in. (governs)
Since, v = 14.21 k/in. > vu = 5.41 k/in., the 5/16" fillet weld is adequate for the web-to-flange
welds.
104
9.0 REFERENCES
1. AASHTO (2014). AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, 7th Edition, American
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, DC.
105

Steel Bridge Design Handbook Design Example 2A

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Steel Bridge Design Handbook Design Example 2A

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

U.S.

Steel Bridge Design Handbook

Joseph L. Hartmann, PhD, P.E.

7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No.

15. Supplementary Notes

17. Key Words 18. Distribution Statement

Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed pages authorized

Figure 1 Sketch of the Typical Bridge Cross Section .................................................................... 2

Table 1 Section 1 Steel Only Section Properties ......................................................................... 15

Figure 1 Sketch of the Typical Bridge Cross Section

3.1 Web Depth

0.027(90 ft)(12 in./ft) = 29.2 inches

Figure 3 Sketch of the Girder Elevation

3.2 Web Thickness

3.3 Flange Geometries

bf = 14.0 inch (satisfied)

tf 1.1 tw Eq. (6.10.2.2-3)

t f = t f-min 0.75 1.1(0.4375) 0.48 (satisfied)

t f = t f-min 1.125 1.1(0.5) 0.55 (satisfied)

(0.75)(14)3 /12 171.5

(1.125)(14)3 /12 257.25

4.1 Dead Loads

4.1.1 Component Dead Load (DC)

Haunch (average wt/length) = 0.017 k/ft

Overhang taper = 2 x (1/2) x [3.5-(7/12)] x (2/12) x 0.150/4 = 0.018 k/ft

Girder (average wt/length) = 0.174 k/ft

Cross-frames and misc. steel = 0.015 k/ft

Stay-in-place forms = 0.015 x (30-3 x (12/12))/4 = 0.101 k/ft

Total DC1 =1.308 k/ft

Barriers = (0.520 x 2)/4 = 0.260 k/ft

DC2 = 0.260 k/ft

4.1.2 Wearing Surface Dead Load (DW)

Wearing surface = (0.025) x (34)/4 = 0.213 k/ft

4.2 Vehicular Live Loads

4.2.1 General Vehicular Live Load (Article 3.6.1.2)

4.2.2 Optional Live Load Deflection Load (Article 3.6.1.3.2)

4.3 Wind Loads

4.4 Load Combinations

D = Ductility factor (Article 1.3.3)

5.1 Multiple Presence Factors (Article 3.6.1.1.2)

5.2 Live-Load Distribution Factors (Article 4.6.2.2)

5.2.1 Live-Load Lateral Distribution Factors Positive Flexure

eg = 8.0 / 2 + 2.0 + 26.01 - 0.75 = 31.26 in.

Kg = n(I + Aeg2) = 8(15,969 + 48.88(31.26)2) = 509,871 in.4

Figure 4 Sketch of Section 1, Positive Bending Region

5.2.1.1 Interior Girder Strength and Service Limit States

5.2.1.1.1 Bending Moment

5.2.1.2 Exterior Girder Strength and Service Limit States

5.2.1.2.1 Bending Moment

m1 = 1.20 (from Table 3.6.1.1.2-1)

DF = 0.7 x 1.2 = 0.840 lanes

Figure 5 Sketch of the Truck Location for the Lever Rule

Modified Interior Girder Distribution Factor:

DF = 0.990(0.734) = 0.727 lanes

NL = number of lanes loaded

Nb = number of beams or girders

Figure 6 Sketch of the Truck Locations for the Special Analysis

Modified Interior Girder Distribution Factor:

DF = 0.860 lanes (governs)

5.2.1.3 Fatigue Limit State

5.2.1.3.1 Bending Moment

Exterior Girder, DF = 0.840 / 1.20 = 0.700 lanes

Interior Girder, DF = 0.508 / 1.20 = 0.423 lanes